Senators Block Trump’s Immigration Reforms

by NEIL MUNRO 15 Feb 2018

60 Democrats and business-first establishment Republican Senators blocked President Donald Trump’s populist immigration reform agenda, pushing the hot-button topic towards the November election.

Democratic leader Chuck Schumer used his brief speech before the vote to blame President Donald Trump for the Democrats’ refusal to accept a reform-for-amnesty deal, saying:

President Trump created this problem by terminating the DACA program last August. Since then, President Trump has stood in the way over every single proposal that could become law …  President Trump has failed his test of leadership spectacularly.

The Trump-backed bill, led by Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, lost by 39 to 60, showcasing the political clout of the tacit alliance between pro-immigration progressive Democrats and roughly 12 business-first Republicans, plus at least one anti-amnesty Republican. Many business groups had pressured the GOP Senators to vote against the reforms, largely because Trump promised to cut future legal immigration levels.

The defeat may block pending Senate negotiations over the appropriation of $1.6 billion for the border-wall spending in 2018. The funding decision is slated for completion in late March.

The defeat also invites Trump to make immigration reform a central issue in the November election. White House officials have pushed that strategy in the last few days, noting that polls show that most Americans want immigration rules to favor Americans and their paychecks — instead of cheap-labor companies or immigrants.

The vote showed that several red-state Democrats facing the voters this November joined with the business-first Republicans to maintain wage-cutting immigration, and to preserve the unpopular visa-lottery and chain-migration programs.

Throughout the four-vote series of amendments, few Democrats crossed the line to vote for Trump’s pro-American proposals, while several Republicans backed the cheap-labor amnesty bills.

For example, only three Democrats voted against the Democrats’ main proposal — which would have suspended enforcement of immigration law for migrants who arrived before January 1 (a morning draft of the legislation said the deadline was June 30).

At least two of those Senators only voted no after the 41 GOP Senators had already successfully voted to block the proposal. They were New Mexico Sen. Tom Udall and California Sen. Kamala Harris. The final result was 47 to 54.

Three red-state Democratic Senators voted for the Grassley/Trump measure. They were North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp, Indiana Sen. Joe Donnelly and West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin. Roughly 14 GOP Senators voted against the reform. 

Also, 8 Republicans voted for the Democrats’ main amnesty bill, which was credited to the Democrat-dominated “Common Sense Coalition.” The amnesty GOP Senators were led by Sen. Lindsey Graham and Sen. Jeff Flake, but also included Maine Sen. Susan Collins, South Dakota Sen. Mike RoundsAlaska SenLisa Murkowski, Tennesee Sen. Lamar Alexander, and Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson. The Democrats’ anti-enforcement measure was also supported by GOP Sen. Cory Gardner, who is actually the chairman of the GOP Senators’ 2018 election campaign.

Media outlets portrayed the GOP’s business-first Senators as “moderates” or “conservatives.”

Screen Shot 2018-02-15 at 5.59.55 PM

The 14 GOP Senators who voted against the Grassley-Trump measure included South Dakota’s Sen. John Thune, who is a member of the leadership team with Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell. The no votes included Sen. Ted Cruz, who said earlier he would oppose it because it endorsed an amnesty along with immigration reforms.

Four GOP Senators — Flake, Gardner, Graham, Murkowski — also voted yes for another amnesty bill drafted by Democratic Sen. Chris Coons and GOP Sen. John McCain. That bill was defeated 47 to 52. Sen. Joe Manchin, a red-state Democrat who faces the voters in November, vote against the Coons-McCain giveaway.

Nearly all Democratic Senators voted against a proposal by GOP Sen. Toomey to financially penalize sanctuary cities. The amendment got 54 votes, which kept it six votes below the 60-vote threshold. Forty-seven Democrats voted against sanctuary-city penalties.

Even without the new laws from Congress, Trump can continue to enforce immigration laws, punish employers for hiring illegals and update visa and security rules to exclude dangerous migrants.

Many polls show that Trump’s 2016 immigration policies are very popular in the polling booth. His proposed amnesty for 1.8 million illegals gets high scores in business-funded polls but is unlikely to shift any votes into the GOP column in November.

Immigration polls which ask people to pick a priority, or to decide which options are fair, show that voters in the polling booth put a high priority on helping their families and fellow nationals get decent jobs in a high-tech, high-immigrationlow-wage economy. Those results are very different from the “Nation of Immigrants” polls which are funded by CEOs and progressives, and which pressure Americans to say they welcome migrants.

Four million Americans turn 18 each year and begin looking for good jobs in the free market.

But the federal government inflates the supply of new labor by annually accepting roughly 1.1 million new legal immigrants, by providing work-permits to roughly 3 million resident foreigners, and by doing little to block the employment of roughly 8 million illegal immigrants.

The Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via mass-immigration floods the market with foreign laborspikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.


Published on Feb 13, 2018

Students at Trinity University expressed displeasure with the idea of Donald Trump building a border wall. When asked for their solution, many gave their approval for ‘open borders.’

Cabot Phillips | Campus Reform – FEBRUARY 13, 2018

This year, much of the gridlock in Washington has centered around the inability of Congress to reach an agreement on immigration reform—particularly the idea of building a wall along the southern border.

Wanting to find out if college students would be as divided on the issue, Campus Reform headed to Trinity College in San Antonio, Texas, to ask a simple question: What would you like to see on the border?

Immediately, it was clear the vast majority of students at Trinity were no fans of Trump’s proposal for a border wall.

While a few admitted off-camera that they like the idea of a wall, they refused to offer support for it on the record, citing fears that others on campus would ostracize them.

So what exactly would opponents of the wall like to see instead?

While some simply advocated for increased security, others immediately turned to “open borders” as the solution.

Claiming it would lead to “more mixing of cultures” and even the playing field for disadvantaged people in other countries, multiple students vehemently offered their support for the concept.

Amnesty Advocates Decry ICE Enforcing Law at Apartment Complex

by BOB PRICE 13 Feb 2018

Amnesty and open borders advocates complain that U.S. Immigration and Enforcement (ICE) officers are going to Houston apartment complexes that have large Hispanic populations.

FIEL, an advocacy group located in the Bayou City point to the arrest of a Guatemalan national, Carlos Gudiel Andres, according to a report by the Associated Press. ICE agents arrested Andres last month at a Houston complex.

His family told the press that ICE officers approached Andres about certain individuals they were looking for, and in the process asked him for his identification. When he gave the agents his ID, they determined there was an active deportation order on him.

Cesar Espinosa, executive director of FIEL (Familias Immigrantes y Estudiantes en la Luchall or “Immigrant Families and Students in the Struggle”), said that his group received other reports of ICE agents at apartment complexes in Houston during early mornings. No further explanation or details beyond the Andres case were reported.

Espinosa charged that he wants to know “if they’re asking only certain people who may look a certain way,” the AP reported.

A statement from ICE officials to the AP said Andre’s apartment was “identified as part of a targeted enforcement operation.”

In previous statements to Breitbart Texas, ICE officials stated:

ICE deportation officers conduct targeted enforcement operations every day in locations around the country as part of the agency’s ongoing efforts to protect the nation, uphold public safety and protect the integrity of our immigration laws and border controls.

These are existing, established fugitive operations teams. ICE does not conduct sweeps, checkpoints or raids that target aliens indiscriminately.

Reports of ICE checkpoints and sweeps are false, dangerous and irresponsible. These reports create panic and put communities and law enforcement personnel in unnecessary danger. Any groups falsely reporting such activities are doing a disservice to those they claim to support.

During targeted enforcement operations ICE officers frequently encounter additional suspects who may be in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws. Those persons will be evaluated on a case by case basis and, when appropriate, arrested by ICE.

As part of the illegal immigration crackdown by the Trump Administration, U.S. Acting ICE Director Thomas Homan issued a directive in January ordering ICE officers to target criminal aliens appearing in courthouses, Breitbart Texas reported. Homan explained, “ICE’s enforcement activities in these same courthouses are wholly consistent with longstanding law enforcement practices, nationwide.”


What does that have to do with learning history? – FEBRUARY 11, 2018

An Austin middle school assigned students to draw themselves as slaves in an attempt to understand “slave life in 1850s Texas.”

Four Points Middle School gave an assignment for students to draw themselves as slaves and describe what they would smell, hear, see, taste, and touch if they were a slave in the Civil War.

“There’s nothing about slavery that I would want any child, regardless of color, to have to relive,” mother Tonya Jennings toldKVUE News.

“I turn it, and then, of course, my eye is drawn to the title, ‘Making Sense with the Senses.’ And then I read the four points. And I stopped after reading, ‘Draw a picture of yourself as a slave.’ I just stopped right there,” Jennings said.

Jennings said she was at a loss for how to explain the relevance of the assignment to her 12-year-old daughter.

“I realized I had to explain to her what this meant or what they were trying to get to. And then I realized I didn’t know what they were trying to get to or what they were trying to do,” she said.

“It is completely out of place. It just doesn’t even go with the packet at all. To ask my child to put herself in a situation where she has to draw herself as a slave was an issue just, you know, all the way up the board.”

A Leander Independent School District spokesperson issued a statement to the local media on Saturday about the matter:

“A parent contacted Four Points Middle School earlier today with a concern about a Texas History lesson regarding the Civil War and the role of slavery. The campus quickly responded to the parent to hear his concerns and discuss the situation. When teaching sensitive content, we strive to deliver lessons with care and context to our students.”

“The tragic impacts of slavery are well documented and relevant to our state and nation’s history. The state curriculum for seventh-grade history expects students to explain reasons for Texas’ involvement in the Civil War, including states’ rights, slavery, sectionalism and tariffs. The state also asks students to be able to identify points of view from the historical context surrounding an event and the frame of reference that influenced the participants.”