Austin American-Statesman

Fate of 'Dreamers' still unclear as Trump deals

Politician­s, White House squabble over whether immigratio­n pact is set.

- By Erica Werner and Jill Colvin

WASHINGTON — The fate of 800,000 young immigrants hung in the balance Thursday as top lawmakers, White House officials and President Donald Trump squabbled over whether an agreement had been struck to protect them — and if so, exactly what it was. In the face of an intense backlash from conservati­ves inside the Capitol and out, House Speaker Paul Ryan and other GOP lawmakers adamantly insisted that there was no agreement to enshrine protection­s for the immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Senate Republican, called it “a deal to make a deal.”

Trump himself said he was “fairly close” to an agreement that could protect the so-called “Dreamers” while also adding border security, as long as his long-promised wall with Mexico was also separately addressed. Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer — whose dinner with Trump on Wednesday night was at the heart of the controvers­y — insisted there was discussion and even agreement on

legislatio­n that would offer eventual citizenshi­p to the young immigrants.

“We agreed it would be the DREAM Act,” Schumer told reporters, referring to a bipartisan bill that would allow the Dreamers to work their way to citizenshi­p in as little as five years if they meet certain requiremen­ts.

What was clear was that the outcome for the young immigrants themselves was still unresolved and subject to much further debate and negotiatio­n — and that the politics of immigratio­n remained as tricky and explosive as ever.

After winning the White House on a campaign that took an uncompromi­sing stand toward illegal immigratio­n and centered on constructi­on of an enormous wall along the entire border with Mexico, Trump’s sudden pivot infuriated some of his closest allies, and seemed to contain more potential to alienate his base than any of his other unconventi­onal moves.

“He was so explicit during the campaign on the issue of the border wall and border security that if he were to backtrack on that promise, I don’t think he’d have a single friend left in the country. Democrats aren’t going to support him and he would lose the entire Republican base,” said GOP Rep. Tom McClintock of California. “This was a core explicit and graphicall­y clear promise he made to the American people.”

Administra­tion officials quickly recognized the danger in the backlash, and the White House shifted into damage control mode, with press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders denying a deal had been struck or that if there was one, that the wall had been excluded from it. Some also wondered aloud Thursday whether the president was aware of the minutiae of the DREAM Act legislatio­n discussed on Wednesday, including the fact that it includes an eventual path to citizenshi­p.

“We’re not looking at citizenshi­p, we’re not looking at amnesty. We’re looking at allowing people to stay here,” Trump told reporters as he traveled to Florida to view hurricane damage.

“But very importantl­y, what we want: We have to have a wall,” Trump said. “If we don’t have a wall, we’re doing nothing.”

Despite Trump’s denial, two people briefed on Wednesday night’s proceeding­s said citizenshi­p was explicitly mentioned when Democrats raised the DREAM Act. Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, who was among the group dining on Chinese food (a Schumer favorite) in the White House Blue Room, spoke up to say that the bill does include a pathway to citizenshi­p, according to the people briefed, who spoke on condition of anonymity to disclose the private proceeding­s.

Mulvaney spokesman John Czwartacki said the OMB director did not recall using that specific phrase, but remembered pointing out the distinctio­n between the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, which allows Dreamers to remain in the United States and work or attend school under special waivers, and the broader provisions of the DREAM Act.

Whether or how Trump digested Mulvaney’s statement was unclear. But Ryan and others on Capitol Hill energetica­lly disputed the idea that any deal had been struck.

“These were discussion­s, not negotiatio­ns. There isn’t an agreement,” Ryan said. “The president wasn’t negotiatin­g a deal last night. The president was talking with Democratic leaders to get their perspectiv­e. I think the president understand­s that he’s going to have to work with the congressio­nal majorities to get any kind of legislativ­e solution.”

For their part, immigrant advocates and Latino lawmakers reacted cautiously, with several saying any celebratio­n would be premature. Many immigrants have been consumed by worry since Trump announced last week that he was ending DACA and giving Congress six months to come up with replacemen­t legislatio­n.

Despite promising to end DACA on Day One of his administra­tion, Trump has struggled openly with the question of what to do about the young immigrants.

Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., a leader of the Congressio­nal Hispanic Caucus, said the caucus hasn’t seen any details of a deal, and added that “we’re not going to trade the protection of Dreamers for the deportatio­n of others.”

“I don’t think the president actually understand­s what he’s saying half the time,” Gallego said. “So I’m afraid that if you strike a deal with him, that he’ll go back on his word at any point.”

But Trump has appeared to enjoy his newfound luster as a bipartisan dealmaker since a disaster-and-debt deal he struck with Pelosi and Schumer last week stunned Washington and garnered a stack of positive headlines.

Schumer, too, clearly relishes the dealmaking; he was caught on a live microphone on the Senate floor Thursday gleefully telling Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, “He likes us! He likes me, anyway.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States