So after just one year of tax-cutting and deregulation under the Trump Administration, the Congressional…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: Job Growth Estimate Boosted

So after just one year of tax-cutting and deregulation under the Trump Administration, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has revised its estimate of job growth over the next decade upward by over 2.5 million new jobs.  As they say in the legal field, "res ipsa loquitur" - "the fact speaks for itself."

. [caption id="" align="alignleft" width="325" caption="Upward Job Growth Estimate"][/caption]

.…[more]

April 18, 2018 • 09:53 am

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
With DC Distracted, Immigration Debate Reaches Critical Point Print
By Byron York
Tuesday, January 09 2018
It is a decisive moment in the Trump presidency, and in the debate over immigration.

While Washington obsesses over a new book on White House intrigue, the Trump administration is reaching a critical point on the issue of immigration, one of the president's top priorities and the subject of his most often-repeated campaign promises.

There are multiple moving parts: The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, a border wall, chain migration, the visa lottery and hanging over it all  funding the government. But everything hinges on DACA, unilaterally imposed by Barack Obama to temporarily legalize nearly 800,000 people who were brought to the U.S. illegally when they were young.

When President Trump rescinded DACA last Sept. 5, he delayed implementation for six months to give Congress time to come up with some sort of solution for the so-called Dreamers. That means lawmakers need to act by March 5 or face a decidedly uncertain future.

Nearly everyone on Capitol Hill wants a fix that results in legalization for the Dreamers. Democrats want to legalize right away, straight up, no strings attached. But Trump and most Republicans want a deal: immigration reforms  the wall, chain migration, visa lottery  in exchange for legalization.

That's where funding the government comes in. A temporary funding resolution passed last month expires on Jan. 19. Congress can pass a "clean" bill to avoid a partial shutdown, or it can have a fight if one party tries to attach unrelated policy preferences to the must-pass spending bill.

That is the traditional Republican role, which has led Republicans to believe that they always lose shutdown fights. But it is probably more accurate to say that Republicans don't always lose shutdown fights  it is the party that tries to attach unrelated policy preferences to must-pass spending bills that loses shutdown fights. In the past, that has been Republicans. This time, it might be Democrats.

The Senate's No. 2 Democrat, Dick Durbin, appears to be itching to set off a shutdown crisis over DACA. "President Trump has said he may need a good government shutdown to get his wall," Durbin said recently. "With this demand (for wall funding), he seems to be heading in that direction."

But Trump, who in the past has threatened a government shutdown over the wall, is now proposing trading his policy preferences  the wall, etc.  in exchange for DACA legalization. "The wall is going to happen, or we're not going to have DACA," he said recently. He hasn't demanded they be passed in order to keep the government running. Durbin is suggesting Democrats demand DACA passage to keep the government in business.

It's a losing strategy. Democrats could have pursued it when government funding came up in December. But when push came to shove, they didn't. Now, will they try for real?

If the government were to shut down because of DACA, it would elevate the question of amnesty for these illegal immigrants far beyond the status it has now," says one GOP lawmaker. That seems less likely to capture the voters' attention than a question of shutting down the government.

It's one thing to block a DACA fix because of a policy demand  in this case, the wall. But it's a much different thing to force a partial government shutdown because of a policy demand. Durbin and Democrats are likely to find that out, if they don't already know.

Assuming the government is funded, with either a long-term or kick-the-can, short-term measure, the DACA negotiations will start in earnest ahead of that March 5 deadline.

Can Trump get what he wants, or part of what he wants? At the moment, Democrats seem determined to throw their bodies in front of any plan to build a wall. The president has asked Congress to put aside $18 billion over the next 10 years for the job. That seems doomed.

But what about some other idea? What about passing a down payment  the House has already approved $1.6 billion  as part of another plan?

"One possibility would be a relatively modest down payment that Democrats could swallow," said the GOP lawmaker, "and then authorization for a user-fee model for future years. So a fee for visas or border crossings could be turned into a dedicated revenue stream for wall construction." (That would, by the way, mean that, yes, Mexico pays for the wall, or at least a significant part of it.)

The president also wants a measure to stop chain migration, and perhaps a provision to end the visa lottery, too. It seems highly unlikely he would get it all. But he might get something.

Trump will be offering permanent legalization for those nearly 800,000 Dreamers, or perhaps for an even larger group referred to as DACA-eligible. It depends on whether Democrats believe that giving Trump something in return is the only way to achieve that legalization.

It is a decisive moment in the Trump presidency, and in the debate over immigration. Right now, it's fair to say nearly no one in the Washington press corps is paying much attention  they would much rather discuss Steve Bannon, or the 25th Amendment or whether the president watches too much TV. But the coming weeks will be crucial for the agenda that won Donald Trump the White House.


Byron York is chief political correspondent for The Washington Examiner.
COPYRIGHT 2018 BYRON YORK

Question of the Week   
Under which one of the following pen names were “The Federalist Papers” published (1787-1788)?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"In yesterday's column, I contended that it was outrageous for federal district judge Kimba Wood to direct that talk-radio and Fox News host Sean Hannity be publicly identified as Michael Cohen's third client. ...The court's order that Hannity's name be disclosed in open court violated longstanding, judicially endorsed standards against identifying uncharged persons in legal proceedings attendant…[more]
 
 
—Andrew C. McCarthy, Legal Commentator, Terrorism Expert and Former Federal Prosecutor
— Andrew C. McCarthy, Legal Commentator, Terrorism Expert and Former Federal Prosecutor
 
Liberty Poll   

Will House Speaker Paul Ryan's decision not to seek re-election have a postive, negative or no effect on Republican chances to hold a majority in the mid-term elections?