Skip to content

Donald Trump releases his 70-point immigration blueprint

October 9, 2017

  Earlier today Donald Trump released his 70-point immigration blueprint (I am calling it a “blueprint” and not a “plan” because this is supposed to be a negotiating starting point) which would allow dreamers to remain in the United States with some concessions coming from the Democrats in return. 

  Here is more:

The Trump Administration said on Sunday it is “ready to work with Congress” on three immigration objectives: border security (fund and build a southern wall); interior enforcement (uphold immigration laws and return visa overstays); and merit-based immigration (green cards for spouses and minor children only; establish a merit-based system that puts skills ahead of family connections).

And here are some of the main points:


— Complete construction of the southern border wall, to be paid for in part by allowing the Department of Homeland Security to raise fees from the processing of immigration-benefit applications;
— Prompt removal of minors, including unaccompanied alien children, and relatives crossing the border illegally.
— Stricter standards for people who claim asylum;
— Expand the expedited removal process, including hiring an additional 370 Immigration Judges and 1,000 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorneys;


Interior Enforcement:

— Stop sanctuary cities by making them ineligible for certain federal grants;
— Hire an additional 10,000 ICE officers and 300 Federal prosecutors to handle immigration cases and boost law enforcement;
— End visa overstays;
— End catch-and-release;
— Prevent gang members from receiving immigration benefits.
— Protect U.S. workers by requiring E-Verify and strengthening laws to stop employment discrimination against U.S. workers.


Merit-Based Reforms:

— End chain migration by limiting family-based green cards to spouses and minor children of immigrants who are here legally;
— Establish a point-based system for awarding green cards that protects U.S. workers and taxpayers, encourages assimilation, and ensures the financial self-sufficiency of newcomers;
— Eliminate the ‘Diversity Visa’ lottery that awards 50,000 green cards at random to foreign nationals, many of whom have absolutely no ties to the United States, no special skills, and limited education;
— Set the number of refugees at an ‘appropriate level’.

Needless to say this was rejected out of hand by Democratic leadership:

In joint statement, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the plan “anathema to Dreamers,” to immigrants in general, and to the “vast majority” of Americans.


“We told the President at our meeting that we were open to reasonable border security measures alongside the DREAM Act, but this list goes so far beyond what is reasonable. This proposal fails to represent any attempt at compromise,” Schumer and Pelosi wrote.


“The list includes the wall, which was explicitly ruled out of the negotiations. If the President was serious about protecting the Dreamers, his staff has not made a good faith effort to do so.”

  Luis Gutiérrez went so far as to call this plan an “extension of the white supremacist agenda” on Sunday. 

  As I wrote above, this is a starting point, a negotiation tactic of starting high and bargaining down to a point both sides can agree to. But it is clear the Democratic leadership has a different idea of what negotiating means: they seem to believe it is give us what we want in return for nothing.

  In the recent past the Democrats have claimed that Donald Trump was trying to hold the dreamers hostages to push his immigration plan but I think we are seeing just the opposite. I believe the Democrats have made the political calculation that it would benefit the party if there was no DREAM Act compromise. They would rather see the dreamers deported so they can use it against Donald Trump and the Republicans in 2018 and 2020.

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium


13 Comments leave one →
  1. October 10, 2017 12:16 am

    The “blueprint” as presented is very reasonable. Why should the US accept bottom of the barrel immigrants? Most countries want skilled educated workers who will benefit the larger society. We already have too many immigrants who have not integrated into the larger society.

    Rep Gutierrez should have been punished by the House for giving San Juan’s mayor the “we are dying” t-shirt.

    Liked by 2 people

    • October 10, 2017 5:27 am

      I agree with you 100%! By the way, I was wondering how she got that shirt. I didn’t know he gave it to her but that makes sense.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. kdocburgess permalink
    October 10, 2017 7:45 am

    Reblogged this on Deplorables Seeking Justice-DSJ and commented:
    Earlier today Donald Trump released his 70-point immigration blueprint (I am calling it a “blueprint” and not a “plan” because this is supposed to be a negotiating starting point) which would allow dreamers to remain in the United States with some concessions coming from the Democrats in return.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Brittius permalink
    October 10, 2017 9:07 am

    Reblogged this on Brittius.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Paul Sulley permalink
    October 12, 2017 12:50 am

    The President’s plan is reasonable, logical, rational and totally Pro-American.
    The opponents to the plan are unreasonable, illogical, irrational and Anti-American…
    That’s it in a nutshell….

    Liked by 1 person

  5. October 12, 2017 10:42 pm

    The plan is unconstitutional, but that’s nothing new. I wonder how many points Levi Strauss would’ve gotten to be able to come to America.


    • October 13, 2017 5:34 am

      Please explain how this is unconstitutional.


      • October 13, 2017 11:32 am

        We have a government with certain enumerated powers that are listed in Article 1, Section 8. Immigration is not one of them.

        Liked by 1 person

      • October 13, 2017 6:46 pm

        Yes, you are right. Article 1, Section 8 mentions naturalization but not immigration. I would say that naturalization is a subset of immigration. SCOTUS has used this clause and others to rule the Federal government does have the power over the states to set immigration policy. Here is an interesting article on that:
        I am not suggesting SCOTUS was always right but these are the rules we are living under today.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: