Incoming New Jersey Governor Wants to Create an Entire Agency to Protect Illegal Immigrants

Newly inaugurated New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy plans to establish the Garden State as a bastion of far-left policies, including a first-of-its-kind government agency devoted exclusively to protecting the rights of legal and illegal immigrants alike.

Murphy, a former Goldman Sachs financier who was swept into office on the back of former Gov. Chris Christie’s historically low approval ratings, told The Washington Post he plans to operationalize the sentiment behind the “sanctuary” movement by establishing an Office of Immigrant Defensive Protection.

dcnf-logo

While a number of Democratically controlled states have adopted an official policy of non-cooperation with federal immigration authorities, Murphy is seeking to outdo his progressive counterparts by devoting an entire agency to help immigrants navigate the federal immigration bureaucracy.

“It would be a place where everybody could call with questions about their status,” Murphy told The Washington Post. “Our guess is it’s going to be legal services-oriented. One remarkable thing, and you probably have seen this, the rumors that swirl around communities are extraordinary, and it’s literally hard to get, particularly if you’re undocumented, the right answer to your question. That’s when people go back into the shadows.”

Murphy believes he can capitalize on the backlash to Christie’s fiscally conservative approach, establishing New Jersey as a testing ground for a progressive movement that’s gained traction with young voters nationally.

In addition to transforming New Jersey into a “welcoming” state—a term he prefers to “sanctuary”—Murphy plans to legalize the sale of recreational marijuana, mandate a $15 minimum wage, and institute a millionaire tax.

“This state, under the current leadership, has gotten into the belief that if I give something to you, it comes at my expense,” Murphy said. “That’s a myth. Raising the minimum wage does not take from growth, it adds to growth. Earned sick leave gives workers a lot more confidence and adds to their participation in the economy. Equal pay for equal work isn’t, ‘Here, I’ll give this to you.’ It’s confidence, it’s participation.”

He plans to accomplish all of that while wielding the power of the state to counter President Donald Trump’s agenda.

“We’re going to stand our ground on anything we find unacceptable, and unfortunately that list is long, whether it’s immigration policy, it’s offshore drilling, or it’s an awful tax plan,” Murphy said. “We’re not going to compromise on American values and our constitution over here just to get a deal over here. That won’t happen.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post Incoming New Jersey Governor Wants to Create an Entire Agency to Protect Illegal Immigrants appeared first on The Daily Signal.

We Hear You: DACA, Illegal Immigration, Sanctuary Cities, and Voter Fraud

Editor’s note:  It’s helpful to know to what’s on the minds of The Daily Signal’s audience. Here’s a sampling of recent emails to letters@dailysignal.com.—Ken McIntyre

Dear Daily Signal: Thanks for Peter Parisi’s commentary, “The ‘Dreamers’ Have No Right to Demand Anything.” Interesting to see this today, as just yesterday I emailed the following to President Trump:

Mr. President: Please do not give amnesty to the illegal immigrants.  My parents came from Mexico many decades ago. They learned English (and did not have a class for English as a second language), became citizens, and grew to love America.

They never went on welfare nor took advantage of our country. They worked hard and paid their own way even for medical. They were never dependent on the government for anything. They became part of the community.

Today’s illegal aliens are making demands on us and they have no right, just as we have no right to make demands when we go to other countries. Today’s illegal aliens wave the Mexican flag and do not respect our laws, nor do they love our country as immigrants from past decades did.

Remember, that for 40-plus years our country even shut down immigration so that people could assimilate and learn English. Why can that not be done again?

Please, Mr. President, do not give in to any form of amnesty, and please stay firm on getting a complete wall built.

These thoughts are shared by many, many of my conservative friends across the country. (I have an email list of over 500 names, plus a whole group of conservative friends on Facebook, so I know this is how they feel.)—Molly Schubert, Raleigh, N.C.

***

The problem of sanctuary cities and states is not complicated (“Acting ICE Director: Let’s Charge Sanctuary Cities for Violating Federal Law“). Neither is the solution. All we need to solve the problem is accountability by the politicians responsible for passing sanctuary laws.

If Congress were to pass a law making political entities and individual legislators and administrators personally and financially liable for damages stemming from actions of illegal aliens in sanctuary areas, lawyers would carry the ball from there. They would engage in massive financial damage suits and put an end to all sanctuary entities in a matter of months at no cost to the general public, except to the taxpayers in the political entities promulgating “sanctuary.”

States could also enact statewide laws creating financial liability for all legislators and administrators within their authority. Who would vote to pass or keep sanctuary laws knowing that the Steinle family or other victims could bring suit against them for financial damages and win and collect?—Harold Knowles, North Royalton, Ohio

I was speaking with a former student who began dating a young man from Brazil. After a while, they decided that she would get a visa and travel to Brazil and stay with his family for six months. She shared with me that the Brazilian government knew where she was at all times. She had to make periodic visits to government offices to verify her whereabouts and the continued purpose for her visit.

So Brazil can keep tabs on people traveling there on visas, but liberals in our country think that is against people’s rights, and that our government has no right to do ao as a sovereign nation. It’s as if they do not understand what the purpose of government is.

I think it would be interesting to have a story that shows how other governments around the world track people visiting on temporary visas, and how they handle immigration rather than focusing solely on what we do here. People who have never traveled have narrow perspectives that reflect only their experiences and exposures.

I also think it would be interesting to speak with legal immigrants and publish their stories to include why they immigrated to this country, when they immigrated, how they immigrated, how their lives changed afterward, and what their perspective is on illegal immigration.

I’d like to see a poll of legal immigrants and how they feel about illegal immigration. That information should in turn be shared with the government, so they understand that people who immigrate legally do not take kindly to others cutting in line rather than going through legal channels. The legal immigrants I know do not support illegal immigration.—Robin Greer

***

Consider this: The very first thing that must be accomplished to keep this country free is to standardize all voting laws, requirements to be a candidate in any governmental election (city, county, state, and federal), and term limits.

Illegal immigrants and noncitizens should never be permitted to be a candidate for any government position. Our laws need to require having a photo ID and proof of U.S. citizenship for any legal citizen to vote or hold office in any election.

Everyone must be required to have these documents to get Social Security, welfare, and other benefits, and to have their water, lights, and gas turned on at their residence. The only individuals who cannot provide these documents are those who are dead, decide to vote more than once, are convicted felons: fraudulent voters.

Without just and fair voting, there will never be a government without the corruption of foreign control.—P. Panehal

***

The other day in Brentwood, Long Island, police arrested five teens, two of whom were covered by the Delayed Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. They were part of the MS-13 gang, trying to abduct a 16-year-old boy just outside Brentwood High School.

Several months earlier, four boys were brutally murdered in Central Islip, again by MS-13 using teens to lure the boys into the woods where they were beaten and hacked to death.

Do we need DACA? No. Do we need illegal aliens? No.

My grandparents and others came here legally and received no food stamps, no welfare. It was all right for them, but not for these people.—Jack Norris, Bayshore, N.Y.

***

Let President Trump know that Americans do not want anything short of deporting every DACA recipient and other illegal immigrant. They broke our sovereign law. No amnesty, no cutting deals, no ands, ifs, or buts. And make Mexico pay for building the wall.

Think of how much taxpayers’ money will not be used to support illegal immigrants. The amount saved can be the advance payment used to build the wall, instead of having to ask the House and Senate to authorize the money.—J. Kin Ng

***

No DACA, period. My vote is no DACA at any cost. Where is this going to stop?

When President Reagan gave the first (and only) amnesty, this was to be fixed.—Kevin Sanders Sr.

Really Reforming Health Care 

Dear Daily Signal: I read the commentary on proposals to fix government (taxpayers)-funded health care by moving to state block grants, and I’ve got some questions (“Americans Need Health Reform to Be a Priority Issue in 2018“). Why must these taxes go through the federal system where Congress and the executive branch reduce the potential impact to those citizens targeted?

What are the administrative costs of federal and state bureaucracies for Obamacare, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.? What are the administrative costs for businesses and health care providers? How many programs are there, and who are the targets? What are the sources of funding for these programs? How effective are they, and by what measures?

I recently went on Medicaid and was surprised how small a percentage of care providers’ bills were paid. It looks to me that if these costs aren’t inflated, that a provider would be forced to take measures that will not benefit patient care. What are those changes in care we have seen or likely will see?

It doesn’t seem to make economic sense the way things work. Higher demand, price controls, additional patients, increasing costs, and fewer contributors would seem a prescription for disaster.

Are there efforts to look at the way we deliver health care instead of how we pay for it? Will the moves by Aetna and others to provide health care via storefronts lower costs or raise demand? Do restrictions on who can legally provide health care limit supply?—Bob Taylor

Saying No to Assisted Suicide

Dear Daily Signal: Thanks for your article and video on J.J. Hanson and his rejection of physician-assisted suicide (“This Marine Veteran Just Died of Cancer at 36. Here’s Why He Fought Assisted Suicide“). He was right to do what he did.

Doctors who provide physician-assisted suicide, I believe, are compromising the Hippocratic oath they took when they became a doctor in the first place. How can patients trust their doctors if they cannot, first and foremost, trust their doctors to save their lives?

Does physician-assisted suicide destroy the physician-patient relationship? I believe it does.

The group that made the video of Mr. Hanson should reach out to medical allies in the pro-life community such as the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Catholic Medical Association, and the American College of Pediatricians.

Doctors can do their best to give patients their best advice.  But they can’t accurately predict the future. Further, patients who have a strong faith can live productive lives and can be healed. There are no guarantees.

But, why give up?  As Mr. Hanson pointed out, these families would suffer greatly with the loss of their loved one.

Thanks for your great reporting. Blessings for a great 2018.—Kathleen Goryl

A Danger After Tax Reform

Dear Daily Signal: I am writing to warn of a danger that I don’t think President Trump has noticed regarding the new tax law (“Taxpayers Could See Benefits of GOP Tax Bill as Early as February“). I heard one speaker say after passage of tax reform that taxpayers would see the difference in their filing in 2019.  But even the president is talking as if it will happen in our April 2018 tax filing.

Why is this bad? Republicans have put out so much hype about taxpayers saving money, and I can assure you that most Americans will have not heard, not paid attention, not understood that all this tax-savings hype will not make any difference to them until 2019.

When April rolls around and we process our taxes, what the taxpayer will realize is that nothing has changed.Taxpayers will be teed off.  You had better believe that the Democrats will take full advantage and proclaim that the president lied. Well, there go the 2018 midterm elections to the Democrats.

What the president needs to do is to explain it better and to keep the left from taking total control. He need to act immediately. And to jump-start the new law, he needs to provide a tax rebate or other stimulus that will be received by Americans in 2018, to hold taxpayers over until the 2019 filing. Otherwise voters will run away.—Don P., Richmond, Va.

I’ve been getting into it with some of my liberal friends about AT&T and Comcast {“Companies Announce Bonuses, Raises Following Passage of Tax Reform“). They’re basically saying the new tax law has nothing to do with the companies’ recent announcements of wage increases and business investments. Plus they point out the recent AT&T layoffs as evidence tax reform didn’t save jobs.

I know the layoffs were announced last year, so it had nothing to do with the tax reform bill. But if you could point me anywhere that would debunk their claims, that would be great.—Andy Schatner

***

Americans are worried about our growing budget deficit (“Congress Could Soon Face a Budget Fight. Here’s How Lawmakers Can Rein in Spending“).  The national debt will continue to rise as long as Congress doesn’t control spending.  It can take two actions–stop unauthorized appropriations and stop pork from being added to bills.

Our congressmen waive or disregard their own rules against unauthorized appropriations.  The rules of “paygo” don’t preclude them from enacting legislation to increase direct spending. In other words, our congressmen spend taxpayers’ money at will.

Almost every bill that Congress passes has pork added at the last minute. Congress must prohibit any addition to any bill that is unrelated to the topic or adds pork or other spending. This would cut a lot of wasteful spending.

America is becoming enslaved by debt.—Persistent Professor

Fake News and Classified Information

Dear Daily Signal: A review of the code of ethics for the Society of Professional Journalists indicates to me that fake news including contrived reports or sloppy checkingis unethical (“The History of Fake News in the U.S.“).  I am not interested in hampering a free press or freedom of speech. However, I would like to put a stop to unnamed sources. I believe that is unethical.

Also, when published information is proved to be wrong, I would like to see the correction given the same prominence, frequency, and distribution as the original error.  I would be happy to have a law to that effect.

Likewise, release of classified information ought to require some restraint. The government ought to appear before an appropriate judicial panel before release of such information. The Constitution included the idea of providing for the common defense, and classified information that puts us at risk ought to have appropriate review (whatever that is) before it gets released by anyone.

Those who steal information for the purpose of exposing something should have to show cause why it should be released.  Failing that, we ought to have loss of employment and pension, fines, and prison as deterrents.  It is a criminal offense and without special circumstances, there should be some justice meted out after due process that currently does not exist.

Both the former FBI director, James Comey, and his law professor friend ought to come to grief from application of current law. We should not play favorites with the law.  Let us not be stupid about providing for the common defense.—Frank Steinle

***

Dear Daily Signal: It is refreshing to see the leftist agenda of the New York Times pointed out, as in Jarrett Stepman’s commentary (“The New York Times Left Socialism Out of Its Report on Venezuela’s Devastation“). There are many other newspapers like the Times, and I wonder how can that happen in the “free” USA built on free enterprise and capitalism. (See PragerU.)

Most mainstream newspapers and universities have become leftist. I think it is simply because of the enormous amount of money pouring in. And people, being weak and greedy, accept the payment, live well, and do not care about the future the leftist agenda has in store. It really is a shame.

One just has to follow the United Nations’ Agenda 21 disguised as “sustainable development,” “clean environment,” etc.  The whole global-warming scare and climate change are just tools to the leftist goals: one world government and suppression of the people.

Once we all drive electric cars, all they have to do is cut electricity and we all become immobile. It is total control of the public and elimination of the middle class. The public has to wake up and see what is behind this movement. President Obama was a champion of it and he did a lot of damage in his eight years, including raising the debt level from $10 trillion to roughly $20 trillion.

Cutting coal and giving away control of the internet was designed to cut freedom, and the people do not know it. Germany’s Angela Merkel complied with an Agenda 21 point to allow free movement of African and Middle Eastern young men  to Europe. France’s Emmanuel Macron is also part of the game.

No wonder in Germany and Austria right-wing politicians gain votes. The European Union and the U.N. need to be dismantled. I am glad Brexit exists, and pray it will go through.—Rolf Pfeiffer

This and That

Dear Daily Signal: I’m a retired, 91-year-old man who worked for the telephone company from 1952 till 1989, and I’m responding to Elizabeth Slattery’s commentary, “This Test Claims to Show Whether You’re Unconsciously Racist.”

I spent about 17 years in the South Bronx as a walking repairman and installer of new telephones. The work was in the tenements and projects. The large majority of jobs was for blacks, Hispanics, and new immigrants from below our borders and Europe.

My opinion of most people must be considered by individual experiences encountered in daily jobs. How can a test designed by people, perhaps never exposed to the real world, be relevant? The answers of those taking the test would necessarily be influenced by encounters in the real world. I intend to take the test for my own interest.—George Fischer

***

Net neutrality assumes everyone using the internet generally are good people, like all internet service providers and businesses are, and that they never would think of doing anything wrong to people for profits or agendas to control information.

Like Twitter counted the freedom of expression of the pro-life congresswoman as worth nothing, and protected the world from ideas different from their outlook of cultural colonization for the good of everyone else?—Mike Kelley

***

Motivational reform is a great way to reverse decades of throwing taxpayer money at social issues, expanded by government, that would not be tolerated in the private sector (“Trump Administration’s 2 Priorities for Welfare Reform Executive Order“).  The old adage “a hand up, not a handout” is still a great rule.

There should be work-related guidelines for any taxpayer assistance, and they should be very strict. The most important lesson is discipline, and that means we don’t need federal bureaucrats defining rules of engagement.—Brannen Edwards

***

I know that many of your readers enjoy the video reports you produce, and on occasion I find them informative. However, I find it more stimulating and thought provoking if the videos would include a transcript. Including the transcript allows me to think about what is being said and review the actual words more thoughtfully.

The audio text takes too much effort to review.  I also believe our society is getting lazy by watching the news rather than reading the text and getting more engaged with the content rather than watching the images.  The images have a way of skewing your thoughts away from perhaps what is truly being said.

Keep up the good work and continue pursuing journalistic excellence.—Joe Christ

Editor’s note: Hopefully you’ve noticed that we’ve begun including transcripts for many of our videos, Joe.

***

Regarding Jarrett Stepman’s recent commentaries: I think that perhaps Charlottesville, Virginia, can be compared to Ferguson, Missouri, and the University of Missouri.  Outside troublemakers intended to bring chaos into the community and bring down whatever they could.

The cost to the city of Ferguson? Monies taken away from the University of Missouri by benefactors, and enrollment has fallen to where they have closed dorms and new facility. Divide and conquer. America is in sad shape and could already be lost. Those who can bring the cause to the forefront are silent.

History is not being taught in schools, but I am a firm believer that America needs to know exactly how Ellis Island worked. I think it would benefit many.—Connie Harris

***

Walter Williams’ commentary about teachers’ academic qualifications (“The Low Academic Quality of Too Many Teachers“) omits two critical issues: teachers’ pay and the willingness to tax sufficiently to pay enough to make teaching at least competitive with comparable professions.—Jacob T. Chachkes

Appreciation and Feedback

Dear Daily Signal: The Daily Signal is basically the only political or worldview source I monitor daily. I always read through the article titles and occasionally read articles. I value this source immensely. This is saying a lot, since when Barack Obama was elected to a second term it marked a healthy change in my perspective from being a bit of a news junkie.

While I’ve been a committed Christian for many years, I finally very much took to heart the words of Psalm 2, which concludes with the words: Blessed are all who take refuge in him. (I actually teach grades 1-4 at a small Lutheran school in Yakima, Washington, with a 60-year history.)

I’ve just finished reading the excellent commentary on Kay Coles James by Paris Dennard (“What I Learned From The Heritage Foundation’s New Leader”). But what got me to finally send a note is my curiosity about the three ads with links under the heading “Trending,” followed by three links to Daily Signal articles.

I haven’t followed these first three links because they seem like they are sensationalism designed to be provocative. But I’m curious as to whether these are something The Heritage Foundation is endorsing, or if they are just paying the bills.

The important takeaway from this note is my appreciation for the work Heritage is doing. On the side is a bit of feedback.—Marilee Nolte

How Are We Doing?

We recently started to read The Daily Signal and love it. Thank you so much for giving us information on what is happening in our world without a progressive (i.e. left wing, liberal) bias. It is so very refreshing. We look forward to each day’s installment. May God richly bless you.—Steve and Sandy McCuen

Great job by your White House correspondent, Fred Lucas. Finally, people are standing up to the liberal bully press. Glad you are doing just that!—Bob Arthurs

You’re doing great.  We need a bulldog over there at The Daily Signal.  God bless your efforts.—Phil Reich

Thank you all. I look forward to seeing The Daily Signal’s Morning Bell every morning. Very good information from someone who can be trusted. Thanks again. Great job done.—Keith Spiers

I truly enjoy your daily briefings.  Thank you.—Winnie Payne

Let me say it again. Why do conservatives keep pointing out how the left is hurting themselvespointing out their faults and telling them how to improve? Say nothing! In the words of the great philosopher W.C. Fields, “Never smarten up a chump.”—Robert Albanese

Every article in Morning Bell Jan. 4 attracted my attention. I receive many, many email posts, and none has the influence on me that yours does.—Joanie Brown, San Luis Obispo, Calif.

I am a new subscriber, and I have to say I love the article and the contributors. Keep up the good work.—Barb Orcutt

The post We Hear You: DACA, Illegal Immigration, Sanctuary Cities, and Voter Fraud appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Wild Overreaction to the Ending of a ‘Temporary’ Immigration Status

Se acabó el tiempo.

Seventeen years after granting “temporary protected status” to nearly 200,000 Salvadoran citizens who had fled earthquakes in 2001 or who were already here illegally and claimed they were unable to return to their homeland because of civil strife, America is setting a deadline: Get right with the law or go home.

As if we haven’t shown enough generosity to these provisional guests in our home, the Department of Homeland Security gave the Salvadorans until September 2019 to get their affairs in order. But the usual suspects in the permanent Gang of Amnesty—identity-politics Democrats, big business Republicans, anti-rule of law activists, and sovereignty-sabotaging pundits—condemned the Trump administration’s announcement this week with a heaping dose of hyperbole.

Maria Rodriguez, executive director of the Florida Immigrant Coalition, called the move a “racial cleansing.”

Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin called the revocation “monstrous” and called on Democrats to hold government funding hostage until the nearly 2-decade-old “temporary” protections were restored indefinitely.

NBC analyst Anand Giridharadas likened the decision to “the German occupation of, and use of forced labor from, Belgium in World War I; and the Armenian genocide.”

That’s insanity. Here’s a proposal. How about I force my way into Mr. Giridharadas’ residence uninvited and demand to stay for at least 17 years under the guise of seeking “temporary” shelter. Would he consider a rational and responsible decision to evict me and reclaim his home for himself and his family tantamount to a war crime?

Enforcing a limit on humanitarian gestures is the responsible thing for any self-sustaining nation to do. Previous Democrat and Republican presidents, however, have shirked their duty—opting instead to renew illegal alien protections ad nauseam. So beneficiaries of our supposedly time-limited generosity established families and footholds here. They gained permanent residency, work permits, and other taxpayer-subsidized benefits, along with ever-expanding lobbying power as a political constituency.

The Temporary Protected Status program was supposed to provide short-term relief and shelter to people from foreign countries hit by natural disasters, environmental catastrophes, civil war, epidemic diseases, or other “extraordinary and temporary conditions.” But they were always expected to go back home when those conditions improved.

The federal statute that created TPS clearly mandates terminating the protections once the conditions that led to TPS designation no longer exist. The law “prohibits judicial review of any determination with respect to the designation, termination, or extension of TPS” and “prohibits the Senate from considering legislation that would adjust the status of TPS aliens to that of a lawful temporary or permanent resident” once the status is removed, according to former House Judiciary Committee immigration counsel Nolan Rappaport.

Back in 1999, however, the Federation for American Immigration Reform warned Congress:

Each special program that provides short-term relief has been followed by persistent demands for similar treatment by other groups and nationalities, not necessarily made up of persons in the same circumstances. It has now been politicized beyond recognition, and certainly no longer deserves the support of the general public.

Indeed, TPS turned into TINO: Temporary in Name Only. Illegal aliens from Honduras and Nicaragua were added to the list, followed by citizens of Haiti, Nepal, Syria, Angola, Sudan, Yemen, Montserrat, and more. To date, we’ve granted sacrosanct TPS status to more than 400,000 people from a total of 22 countries who have grown increasingly entitled to automatic renewal of their protections every 18 months over the past two decades.

There’s no polite way to tell houseguests who’ve overstayed their welcome that it’s time to go, but perpetual amnesty for illegal aliens—whether it’s called TPS, DACA, or DREAM—will only beget more illegal immigration.

Time’s up.

The post The Wild Overreaction to the Ending of a ‘Temporary’ Immigration Status appeared first on The Daily Signal.

House Republicans Roll Out DACA Bill Packed With Border Security and Immigration Reforms

A group of Republican lawmakers unveiled Wednesday a bill that pairs granting legal status to younger illegal immigrants with a laundry list of conservative immigration reforms and border security enhancements, including President Donald Trump’s proposed border wall.

The proposal contains all of the changes to immigration law that Trump has demanded as part of a deal to replace the now-canceled Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, a former President Barack Obama administration order that shielded hundreds of thousands of younger illegal immigrants from deportation.

dcnf-logo

It also incorporates several immigration enforcement measures long advocated by immigration hawks, including penalties for sanctuary cities and foreign nationals who overstay their visas.

Dubbed the Securing America’s Future Act, the bill was teased by its sponsors—GOP Reps. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, Michael McCaul of Texas, Raúl Labrador of Idaho, and Martha McSally of Arizona—in a Tuesday op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. The official rollout Wednesday comes a day after Trump met with a bipartisan group lawmakers to discuss the framework of a bill that would legalize DACA recipients before the program expires in March.

The bill’s authors said the DACA negotiations presented an opportunity to enact tougher immigration law and stave off pressure for a future amnesty of illegal immigrants.

“Americans have been debating how to best fix the country’s immigration system for decades,” they wrote in The Wall Street Journal. “Congress has a unique opportunity to act now, before the country ends up with another large population who crossed the border illegally as children.”

A summary of the bill’s provisions reads like an immigration hawk’s wish list. It would fulfill Trump’s four-point plan for a DACA compromise: legal status for DACA recipients, end to the Diversity Visa Lottery, limits on chain migration, and full funding for the border wall.

The bill also includes several provisions that Trump has not said are necessary to reach a DACA deal, but that immigration hawks have long argued are needed to eliminate the “pull factors” for illegal immigration. Among them are Kate’s Law, which enhances penalties for illegal immigrants who re-enter the country after being deported, and mandatory use of E-Verify, an electronic employment authorization system.

Democrats are almost certain to balk the GOP bill, not least because it does not offer a path to legal permanent residence or citizenship for DACA recipients. The bill instead allows beneficiaries to receive a three-year renewable legal status, essentially reviving the DACA program for the roughly 800,000 illegal immigrants who received protection under the original order.

Despite slim chances of garnering more than a few Democratic supporters, the bill could serve as a starting point for negotiating a DACA replacement.

At Wednesday’s meeting with lawmakers, Trump said he would be willing to place a DACA fix within a “bill of love,” but did not specify what such legislation would entail. The White House clarified Wednesday that any DACA compromise must also do away with chain migration and the diversity visa while also funding the border wall.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post House Republicans Roll Out DACA Bill Packed With Border Security and Immigration Reforms appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Trump: Immigration Deal Has ‘Got to Include the Wall’

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he would not sign an immigration bill without funding for a border wall—clarifying some doubt left over from a bipartisan meeting with members of Congress a day earlier about reaching a deal on the policy for the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.

Asked during a joint White House press conference with Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg if he would sign a deal that didn’t include the wall, Trump responded, “No, no.”

“It’s got to include the wall. We need the wall for security,” the president said. “We need the wall for safety. We need the wall for stopping the drugs from pouring in. I would imagine that the people in the room — both Democrat and Republican —I really believe they’re going to come up with a solution to the DACA problems.”

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, proposed legislation Wednesday to allow illegal immigrants brought to the country as minors receive protection from deportation to get a three-year renewal; to provide $30 billion for construction of the wall, adding  5,000 Border Patrol agents, and another 5,000 Customs and Border Protection officers; defund sanctuary cities; and require employers to use E-Verify to ensure the legal status of workers. Co-authors of the legislation are Reps. Raúl Labrador, R-Idaho, and Martha McSally, R-Ariz.

When meeting with members of Congress Tuesday, the bipartisan group decided to address four issues: DACA, border security, chain migration, and the visa lottery system.

During the meeting, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., asked the president about doing a “clean” DACA bill and saving the other issues for a second phase of a “comprehensive immigration reform.”

Trump, at first, seemed to be warm to the idea.

“We’re going to do DACA, and then we can start immediately on the phase two, which would be comprehensive,” Trump said in response to Feinstein. “I think a lot of people would like to see that. But we need to do DACA first.”

After that, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., jumped into explain the need for border security.

Trump later said during the meeting: “To me, a ‘clean’ bill is a bill of DACA. We take care of them, and we also take care of security, and the Democrats want border security, too. … Then we go to comprehensive later on.”

DACA stemmed from President Barack Obama’s 2012 executive action that shielded an estimated 800,000 illegal immigrants from deportation brought to the country as minors. Comprehensive immigration reform has in past proposals included providing legal status to the more than 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States.

Last fall, the Justice Department announced it was reversing DACA, under threat of a lawsuit from 10 state attorneys general, giving Congress a deadline of March for legislating a replacement. However, on the same day as the bipartisan meeting, a federal judge in California ordered the Trump administration to maintain the program. The Justice Department announced it would appeal the ruling.

Trump also took questions about the possible interview with special counsel Robert Mueller, named to investigate possible collusion between the Trump presidential campaign and Russia.

“There is collusion, but it is really with the Democrats and the Russians far more than it is with the Republicans and Russians,” Trump said.

Many legal experts said they believe Mueller if focused less on Russia and more on building an obstruction of justice case against Trump or associates.

“When they have no collusion, and nobody’s found any collusion, at any level, it seems unlikely that you’d even have an interview,” Trump said.

The post Trump: Immigration Deal Has ‘Got to Include the Wall’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Conservative Group Urges Trump, GOP to Fight Obamacare, Illegal Immigration

President Donald Trump and the Republican Congress should support and prioritize conservative policies this year, including killing off Obamacare and standing tough on illegal immigration, a conservative action group says.

The Steering Committee of the Conservative Action Project (CAP) released a memo calling on both the legislative and executive branches to prioritize specific policies as the White House readies its legislative agenda for 2018 ahead of Trump’s State of the Union address on Jan. 25.

The memo highlights four key initiatives.

  1. Finish repealing Obamacare: Congress and the Trump administration should repeal Obamacare and all of its remaining regulations. The conservative activists also say the government shouldn’t offer health insurance companies “billion-dollar bailouts.”
  2. Refuse to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants: There should be no amnesty for illegal immigrants, including through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Any immigration-reform legislation should be debated openly and transparently, the conservative group adds.
  3. Confirm Trump’s nominees: In order to speed up the process of confirming the president’s judicial and executive branch nominees, the Senate should increase its workweek from just 2.5 days a week to a full workweek, the CAP Steering Committee says.
  4. Support fiscally responsible policies: Republicans have long talked about restoring responsible budgetary and spending policies, and they should take advantage of having a president whose budget outline are hospitable to that goal. 

Twenty individuals and organizations were behind either the creation of the memo or took part in sponsoring it. They include Jenny Beth Martin, chairman of Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund; Adam Brandon, president of FreedomWorks; and Lisa B. Nelson, CEO of the American Legislative Exchange Council. Mike Needham of Heritage Action for America and Becky Norton Dunlop of The Heritage Foundation signed it as well. 

Click here to view the full memo and list of sponsors.

The post Conservative Group Urges Trump, GOP to Fight Obamacare, Illegal Immigration appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Q&A: Black Activist Says Trump Policies, Unlike Obama’s, Create Jobs for Black America

Project 21’s Horace Cooper joined The Daily Signal’s Genevieve Wood to discuss the historic low unemployment rate for black Americans and how the left is co-opting Martin Luther King Jr. Day to protest tax reform and promote action for illegal immigrants covered by the DACA program. Here is an edited transcript of the video.

Wood: Horace, Martin Luther King Day is coming up next week, and there has been a lot of interesting news, especially for the black community on the economic front, in this past week or so. What do you make of the numbers coming out?

Cooper: The news for black America is amazing. It’s phenomenal. We have had three separate records accomplished: In June of 2017, in September of 2017, and in January of 2018, we have set record low unemployment for black Americans. And what’s really exciting, relative to the rest of the country, is black Americans are making much more progress …  and that’s, like, really big gains.  

Wood: You probably just heard that overflight. We’re very close to the Pentagon right now and Reagan Airport, so you’re going to hear a lot of airplanes. Horace, we talk about historic numbers. This is the lowest black unemployment has been in over 45 years. Why all of a sudden? Is it President Obama’s economy, which is kind of what he claimed in the last few weeks?

Cooper: It was surprising to me to hear the president make these claims.

Wood: The former president.

Cooper: The former [president], Obama, make these claims. It was very surprising because from 2009 to 2015, black America’s unemployment rate turned to the worst numbers that we have seen as a community. It was the very policies that he pushed that caused this disparity.

Here’s the thing: Black American unemployment typically is somewhere between 40 percent and even 100 percent higher than white America’s unemployment. When this [black unemployment rate] number in 2018 reached 6.8 percent, that was the narrowest gap we’ve ever seen. We saw nothing like that during the Obama administration.

And it didn’t surprise me, because the policies of President Obama were more focused on handing out food stamps, and assistance, and government handouts, rather than seeing to it that the most important civil rights of all, your right to be independent, your right to be self-sufficient, [were] being honored with policies of limited government. That’s not Obama’s plan.

Wood: Now, President Trump has been in office only one year. What do you think explains the nosedive in unemployment across the board, but particularly with minority Americans?

Cooper: Any investor, any businessman, any company understands now that America is open for business and if you’d like to do business in the United States, we’re going to say, ‘That’s great.’ Remember what the last president said?  ‘You didn’t build that.’ The last president said people that did things, that built things that were consequential, they were the people that we have to go after, to [put in a] stranglehold, a litany of regulations. And by the way, The Heritage Foundation did seminal studies every year, talking about how the last president set records for how many regulatory strangleholds he put on the United States.  

This president, President Trump, is doing just the opposite. Two things: One is, he is not bringing new regulations into place, but [two,] he is actually rolling back the bad regulations that we saw before. So businesses are opening up and it turns out the pool of  people that are most available right now, because of multiple years of bad regulatory and economic growth, are black Americans. And those people therefore are rushing into the marketplace. This is great news.

Wood: It’s great news. But as you well know, Horace, as we come up to MLK Day you are going to have a lot of folks out there talking about how the Trump administration, the tax reform package that was passed just before Christmas, is bad particularly for black Americans. We know this because they have already said they were going to do it.

[House Minority Leader] Nancy Pelosi and a lot of others are going to be holding events over the weekend in “honor” of Martin Luther King Jr., kind of hijacking the holiday, I would argue. To go tell black Americans why this is actually a bad economy for them, the complete opposite of all the numbers and evidence.

Cooper: Here’s the irony, what the left wants to tell black America is, ‘Who are you going to believe, them or your lying eyes?’ If you want to look at your bank account, if you want to look at the value of your home, if you want to make that the test, then you’ll look and you’ll say, ‘Wow, the news is amazing. My uncle, my cousin, even my next-door neighbor, they’re getting jobs that they didn’t have.’

A record 2 million fewer people are receiving food assistance under the Trump administration than before. But it is also not a surprise to me. Here’s the thing: When you look at Martin Luther King, most people remember the ‘I Have a Dream’ speech. What they don’t recall is that the main reason for the big rally at the Lincoln Memorial [in August 1963] was a jobs program.

Black Americans were worried and concerned that there weren’t a lot of great economic opportunities. And that’s how this [March on Washington in 1963] got organized. The essence of what black America and the civil rights effort was about was letting people be able to get the kinds of things that control their own lives.

Wood: The right to a quality education, the right to good jobs.

Cooper: Absolutely. Right. A great house.

Wood: Not the right to handouts, wanting handouts.

Cooper: Absolutely. But the left, with these teach-ins as you mentioned, it’s cynical what they are doing. They don’t have a program for black America. Black America rejected—people don’t realize this—black America rejected Barack Obama’s program. How do I know this? [In 2008], the highest percentage of black Americans in history voted for the Democrat [Obama]. 

In 2012, we saw something happen that we have never seen before. Fewer black people voted for the re-election of a president. We haven’t seen that in 120 years. Not with Clinton, not with Nixon, not with Reagan. Every other re-elected president got more black votes than they did the first time around.

Wood: And why do you think that is? Do you think people really made the calculation within the black community, he hasn’t done what he said he was going to do?

Cooper: They absolutely could see that. You can’t show up the day before Election Day and have to wait for a handout, and then on the day after go and say I’m going to vote for this guy because he is making me great. But the Democrats and the left have been very good, and that’s what this teach-in is about.

Wood: Well, you make a point. And I want to talk more about Project 21 because I’m sure a lot of folks watching are going to say, ‘Wow, the news media doesn’t usually go out and find people like Horace Cooper to talk about Martin Luther King Day.’ 

They want to know where there are more Horace Coopers. And Project 21 is one of those organizations. The release that you all put out talked about, in addition to the teach-in, that while all of that is going on, the liberals are also pushing the Dream Act and trying to legalize a lot of illegal immigrants.  

Cooper: Oh, it’s a classic bait and switch, a beautiful bait and switch. When you don’t have a good program for people—by program, I mean a policy initiative that would be good for them—what you do is you find something to distract them.

What’s ironic is they’re not going to succeed in telling people, in this teach-in that they announced, that ‘You shouldn’t want the tax cuts you are about to get,  you shouldn’t want more money in your bank account, you shouldn’t want more flexibility in the kinds of jobs.  And that’s what’s coming your way. You don’t want that, that’s bad, we want to make you understand that the Trump regulatory tax policies are bad for you.’

Meanwhile, what they don’t say is ‘By the way, we do have a program, not for you, [but] we have a program. It is primarily focused on illegal immigrants. And in fact, even as late as today, the talk is we’ll shut the government down if we don’t get the ability to get the illegal immigration support policy changes that we want. Hey, black America, look at the teach-ins, that’s what we’ve got for you; but for our new favored class, we’ve got real policy changes that are designed to improve and make their livelihoods better.’  

Wood: And in many cases, though, trying to get [illegal immigrants] into the same government programs that got [black Americans] trapped into big government.

Cooper: Well, of course, that’s the ultimate goal.

Wood: Because those folks will often times also turn into voters once they get locked into government. And they become the party of big government.

Cooper: It’s a vicious cycle.

Wood: You’re right, it’s a bait and switch. Let’s talk about Project 21. Tell everybody what Project 21 is, how they can get involved, and how they can learn more about it.  

Cooper: Project 21 is an organization made up of black Americans who have rejected the idea that the only way for black Americans to succeed is if the government specifically engages in a series of handouts or preferential treatment. We are people, moderate and conservative, who say that the best way for black Americans to succeed is the same way it is for [all] Americans to succeed: Strong families, hard work.  Get a good education, engage in the kind of policies where you personally save your money, you’re not extravagant. Where you make the sacrifice and you hand your children.

We believe in limited government, we believe in family values. We believe the church and the synagoge are the primary place where good values get inculcated. Our organization welcomes any American that believes in those kinds of things and wants to make sure that those are the values that we put forward. That got America started, that got America to succeed, that’s the future for America.

Wood: And that’s a lot of things that Martin Luther King Jr. absolutely stood for.

Cooper: Absolutely.

Wood: Horace, thank you.  I’ve known this guy for over 20 years, he is rock-solid. It’s great being on with you. Thanks for coming on and being out here and talking with us.

Cooper: Thanks for having me on The Signal.

Wood: And thank you everybody. Check out Project 21. And thank you for watching us right here on The Daily Signal’s Facebook Live.

The post Q&A: Black Activist Says Trump Policies, Unlike Obama’s, Create Jobs for Black America appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Who ‘Dreamers’ Really Are and Why They Cost $26B Over 10 Years

Giving amnesty to “Dreamers”—young adults brought to the U.S. illegally as children—would create a deficit of about $26 billion over 10 years, according to a report last month from the Congressional Budget Office.

“If we want to save taxpayers’ money, probably the best strategy is to enforce the law and encourage those here illegally to return to their home countries.”—@wwwCISorg’s Steven Camarota

In a video released Monday, the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies details costs presented in the government report.

Steven Camarota, the center’s research director, clarifies in the video that “Dreamers—who were allowed to stay in the country under the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program—are not necessarily college students, as some advocates present them.

Camarota notes that nothing in DACA, which the Trump administration is winding down in favor of action by Congress, “actually requires” that beneficiaries attend college.

“The Congressional Budget Office estimated that about one-third of the [DACA] adults … have not even graduated high school, and only about 15 percent have at least two years of college,” Camarota says, adding that “54.1 percent of households headed by native-born Hispanics access one or more of the welfare programs, and they tend to have poverty rates about twice as high as the general population.”

As Democrats and Republicans fight over the future of this population of illegal immigrants estimated at over 800,000, President Donald Trump tweeted Tuesday that his position is clear: There will be no DACA “fix” if there is no secure U.S.-Mexico border wall.

Some observers say congressional Democrats’ firm stance for amnesty could lead to a government shutdown as a Jan. 19 funding deadline looms.

“If we want to save taxpayers’ money, probably the best strategy is to enforce the law and encourage those here illegally to return to their home countries,” Camarota says in the video.

The post Who ‘Dreamers’ Really Are and Why They Cost $26B Over 10 Years appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Judge Orders Trump Administration To Maintain DACA

A federal judge in California ordered the Trump administration to maintain the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program late Tuesday, an Obama-era amnesty policy that extends legal status to 800,000 illegal aliens who arrived in the U.S. as children.

The ruling could ensures DACA’s security as President Donald Trump attempts to reach an immigration deal with Democratic lawmakers. The program was scheduled to phase out in March.

Judge William Alsup, a Bill Clinton appointee, issued the ruling.

“Tonight’s order doesn’t change the Department of Justice’s position on the facts: DACA was implemented unilaterally after Congress declined to extend these benefits to this same group of illegal aliens,” said Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley. “As such, it was an unlawful circumvention of Congress, and was susceptible to the same legal challenges that effectively ended DACA.”

“The Justice Department will continue to vigorously defend this position, and looks forward to vindicating its position in further litigation,” he added.

The administration justified DACA’s termination on separation of powers grounds, arguing only Congress could authorize such a program.

Alsup strongly rejected this view, pointing to a 2014 Justice Department memo purporting to show that DACA’s features are rooted in Supreme Court case law or related powers granted by Congress.

Since Alsup concluded the program’s rescission was based on a flawed legal premise, he said the action was “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, [and] otherwise not in accordance with law.”

Alsup further noted that Trump himself has determined DACA serves the public interest, citing two September 2017 tweets in which the president expressed support for so-called “Dreamers.”

“We seem to be in the unusual position wherein the ultimate authority over the agency, the chief executive, publicly favors the very program the agency has ended,” the judge wrote.

The order does not require the administration to process new DACA applications, and allows law enforcement to remove any DACA recipient believed to pose a threat to national security or public safety.

The Trump administration can ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review Alsup’s decision.

The Supreme Court recently lifted a sweeping discovery order Alsup issued in the DACA litigation. The judge ordered the Trump administration to release all internal documents relating to the program’s cancellation, despite the government’s insistence that many such records were privileged. The justices concluded that Alsup’s order was overly broad, and ordered him to reconsider the administration’s arguments.

The University of California system brought the suit challenging DACA’s termination. The system is led by Janet Napolitano, the former secretary of Homeland Security who presided over DACA’s original promulgation during the Obama administration.

The ruling can be viewed here.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post Judge Orders Trump Administration To Maintain DACA appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Judge Orders Trump Administration To Maintain DACA

A federal judge in California ordered the Trump administration to maintain the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program late Tuesday, an Obama-era amnesty policy that extends legal status to 800,000 illegal aliens who arrived in the U.S. as children.

The ruling could ensures DACA’s security as President Donald Trump attempts to reach an immigration deal with Democratic lawmakers. The program was scheduled to phase out in March.

Judge William Alsup, a Bill Clinton appointee, issued the ruling.

“Tonight’s order doesn’t change the Department of Justice’s position on the facts: DACA was implemented unilaterally after Congress declined to extend these benefits to this same group of illegal aliens,” said Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley. “As such, it was an unlawful circumvention of Congress, and was susceptible to the same legal challenges that effectively ended DACA.”

“The Justice Department will continue to vigorously defend this position, and looks forward to vindicating its position in further litigation,” he added.

The administration justified DACA’s termination on separation of powers grounds, arguing only Congress could authorize such a program.

Alsup strongly rejected this view, pointing to a 2014 Justice Department memo purporting to show that DACA’s features are rooted in Supreme Court case law or related powers granted by Congress.

Since Alsup concluded the program’s rescission was based on a flawed legal premise, he said the action was “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, [and] otherwise not in accordance with law.”

Alsup further noted that Trump himself has determined DACA serves the public interest, citing two September 2017 tweets in which the president expressed support for so-called “Dreamers.”

“We seem to be in the unusual position wherein the ultimate authority over the agency, the chief executive, publicly favors the very program the agency has ended,” the judge wrote.

The order does not require the administration to process new DACA applications, and allows law enforcement to remove any DACA recipient believed to pose a threat to national security or public safety.

The Trump administration can ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review Alsup’s decision.

The Supreme Court recently lifted a sweeping discovery order Alsup issued in the DACA litigation. The judge ordered the Trump administration to release all internal documents relating to the program’s cancellation, despite the government’s insistence that many such records were privileged. The justices concluded that Alsup’s order was overly broad, and ordered him to reconsider the administration’s arguments.

The University of California system brought the suit challenging DACA’s termination. The system is led by Janet Napolitano, the former secretary of Homeland Security who presided over DACA’s original promulgation during the Obama administration.

The ruling can be viewed here.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post Judge Orders Trump Administration To Maintain DACA appeared first on The Daily Signal.