Weeks after the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) expiration date passed, a group of legislators hopes to “send a message” to Speaker Paul Ryan – a majority of the House supports a “full” debate on immigration.
“It is time to have a full debate for the American public and have the entire country decide what border security should look like, what a permanent fix for Dreamers should look like,” declared Rep. Jeff Denham (R-Calif.) at a press conference near the steps of the Capitol building.
The stated purpose of the bipartisan event was to show Ryan that 240 House members, including 50 Republicans, support a rarely-used procedural measure to bring to the floor without the approval of a committee or the leadership four competing immigration bills.
Under the “Queen of the Hill” rule, the bill which got the most votes – and cleared the 218-threshold for passage – would move to the Senate.
A brilliant last-ditch attempt at a solution to what DACA supporters say is an urgent crisis?
Not really. First, it is not new since Denham pitched the same idea in March.
Second, there is no real-world scenario in which any of the measures would succeed in the House andthen reach the Senate.
Among the four bills under consideration is a bill introduced by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) that has the support of President Trump, but would likely garner no Democrat votes. Conversely, there is little chance Democrats could pull enough Republicans over to vote for the uber-amnesty DREAM Act.
The other two options would be a bill of Speaker Ryan’s choosing and the Hurd-Aguilar bill that ignores the border wall and is weak on legal immigration enforcement.
Lastly, if they truly saw an “urgent” need to find a permanent fix for those nearly 1.8 million individuals who are eligible for DACA, why not commit to using a discharge petition and force a vote even if the leadership refuses to put it on the floor?
Maybe Denham, who is in a tough fight in a district that is 45 percent Latino, and his Republican colleague Will Hurd, whose district in Texas is 72 percent Latino, believe there is benefit to their reelection prospects to paying lip service to open border special interest groups.
If that is the case, can you really believe anything they say?