It took me 10 minutes to explain DACA to a life insurance agent, who'd been in the industry for over 20 years. "In my entire career I've never seen such a steep revision to initially quoted premiums." I paraphrased his remarks on the underwriter's decision to revise the quote for my monthly premiums for a million dollar, 30 year term life insurance from 67 to 248 bucks - a sweet 270% increase - based solely on my immigration status. "Does it matter for the underwriter to know that I have been in the United States for over 20 years and have never left the country once - not even for a brief trip." I told him as my final response. "It really matters on the card you have." He said. I could sense frustration with the decision and sympathy towards me. He knew the deal was off.
This is what DACA is. It is a state of limbo that few understand.
It is not a visa. It is not permanent residency. It is not citizenship. And also, it is not nothing.
Check out the immigration website for details but, at a high level, DACA is an executive policy that grants protection from deportation and, more importantly, work permits to those who came to US as minors by June 15, 2007. You need to renew the grant every 2 years. Obama put it in place in 2012 for folks like us after years, if not decades, of failure of Congress to pass any immigration law - the only way to grant permanent residency or green cards.
From the get-go, DACA was on shaky grounds. Question of whether a President has the authority to grant work permits was being debated. DACA ended up in courts and eventually a district judge deemed it as unlawful and stopped new enrollments but kept renewals in place.
Now, fifth circuit has claimed it unlawful and for some weird reason continued to maintain status quo - i.e. no new DACA approvals, only renewals. Though the decision will be appealed and make its way to the supreme court for the second time (first time was about its implementation), and if, against all odds, supreme court sides with DACA (which it won't), there is the specter of a future President reversing the policy, easily.
In other words, DACA isn't going to stay for long.
As many times DACA has seen the faces of disgruntled judges as it has seen Congress (particularly, Democrats) conjure some solution that has failed to garner sufficient support for it to see the light of day.
Congress has tried everything. Green cards for Dreamers, Registry Date revisions, comprehensive immigration reforms in many forms, citizenship for DACA in military, and so on. But where is the solution in the form of a bill that grants green cards to all "active DACA recipients and those who would qualify for it"... and that's it?
Big non-profits, bullhorns for undocumented folks at the steps of the Capitol, have so far come out to use DACA as a pulpit to drag the dead horse of massive immigration hauls, last of its kind being passed in 1986 - a different world. You see I can use a million dollar in donations received for the eradication of homelessness and use about 800Gs to pay myself an administrative fee, and still have the whole shindig being called as non-profit. These "non-profits" really don't want a solution. They want a fight to fight over in their board rooms. Solving the problem isn't incentivized. Trying to solve it, is.
With cell phones and AR-15s, seems like common sense is also checked out prior to entering special sessions where Democrats discuss legislative priorities, especially immigration. In a political environment where DACA - arguably the lowest hanging fruit in the immigration fight - is making its way to the guillotine, some of the measures proposed by Schumer's party are simply put batsh*t crazy.
Either it's the citizenship for "Dreamers, TPS, and essential workers", with two of the three critical words being so flexible that even the proponents of the bills can't seem to agree on their definitions. Who is a Dreamer? It covers DACA recipients, plus some say who came to US prior to turning 18 even as recently as by December 2021 (see US Citizenship Act), others cap the entry criteria to 4 years prior to enactment of the law. Who is an essential worker? There is the classical, written definition, of essential workers - like agricultural workers, utility workers, doctors, fire fighters, etc. Then there is the abuse of that definition. You get me an affidavit stating that I have hung out on your farms, and I become an essential worker.
These days you hear a lot about registry date. That's another number. Registry is an existing congressional law where anyone who came to US prior to Jan 1, 1972 (read more here), is eligible for a shiny green card. Democrats would like to revisit this and not just propose an updated cutoff date, but make the whole thing a "moving registry". That is, if you came to US X number of years ago, you may get yourself a green card.
What we have yet to hear is the vote on the original question - a bill to provide permanent residency for DACA recipients, and those qualify for DACA. Why is it then Democrats aren't putting forth this rather simple, straightforward bill up for a vote? They may say that they just don't have the support of Republicans. Well, let's let them vote against it, because being the party in power it is at least incumbent to bring to the floor a bill that is hard to vote against.
Circling back to the key about DACA, that it is on its way out. The program has changed lives, around 800,000 of them. And not just any lives but of those who have spent decades of their formative years in the States, studying, working, "growing". Spending 15 years of your life, for example (minimum number of years a DACA recipient had to have been in the country as of 2022 to qualify), from age 6 to 21 plays different than for a person who has been here from age 50 to 65. DACA is now not just an immigration issue, it is a humanitarian issue.
What happens next? Well, Republicans will control the less forgiving and more reactionary chamber - the House, at least, in 118th Congress (starting Jan 2023). Any chance of a meaningful legislation for DACA will be quite slim from that point on. I hate to say it, but if DACA is headed for the guillotine next year and the Democrats are poised to lose absolute Congressional control, then the only real chance for permanent residency for DACA is during the lame duck, i.e. last two months of 2022.
Midterm elections '22 will decide, as always, the lame duck dynamic though. The most likely scenario (not by far, though) is that Democrats lose the House but keep the Senate. This is the best chance for DACA as well. The 10 Republican senators of current Congress have to know that the House in next congress will vote, let alone pass, jack on DACA. This may be the best chance for them to secure some common sense border control provisions and in return give the relief to DACA recipients, which some of the Republicans actually are sympathetic towards.
The second most plausible outcome in November '22 is that Democrats lose both chambers. This will be the worst for DACA. Since they would have revamped negotiation power come Jan 2023, Republicans would want to not do much on DACA during lame duck, especially also when DACA is still on a ventilator and not pronounced dead. Then, come 2023, Republicans aren't even going to talk on DACA until and unless Supreme Court declares it as unlawful and DACA recipients in thousands are losing their jobs. This inevitable decision will probably not make it to the fore till the end of next year, at least. That's another year lost and we are about to enter the crazy 2024, the presidential election year. The best case in this worst case scenario is that Republican Senators allow a vote on a narrow, rigid, bill that provides some protections to DACA recipients (DACA extensions as a congressional action without pathway to citizenship is not off the table also!). This is to gain support of some House republicans. And then Kevin McCarthy, House Speaker, will not allow a vote on any such bill (just like John Boehner did).
I won't write much about the other possible scenarios (D's keep House and lose Senate, or, D's keep Congressional control) because they are almost next to impossible to occur. In both scenarios, talks on DACA will lose steam and spill into 2023 and if they do, then again those will hinge upon Supreme Court.
To cut long story short, if no action is taken on DACA in the last two months of 2022, then a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients is exceptionally unlikely under Biden administration, regardless of Supreme Court's decision. Democrats, please, please, get to work.
No comments:
Post a Comment