# data[].attributes.body
This video is a video is from a Latin American viewpoint on President Trumps and Americas new immigration policy or policies that are trying to be brought into the government. The Latin Americans seem to be very upset with the immigration policies and describes them as racist and unfair. They do not like the idea that America is closing the door to their people and seem to take it as an unfriendly action.
US IMMIGRATION POLICIES, LATIN AMERICA BISHOPS DESCRIBE POLICIES AS DISCRIMINATORY, ACNN TV, 4/10/18, https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=104&v=9r6ZWhB3laY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
US IMMIGRATION POLICIES, LATIN AMERICA BISHOPS DESCRIBE POLICIES AS DISCRIMINATORY.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ACNNTV is the TV station of the Anglican Church of Nigeria, Located at Abuja, Nigeria.

# data[].attributes.body
This video is about congress supposedly threatening the homeland security for carrying out immigration rules that the congress had made for them to follow in the first place. They say that they were only taking care of what the law tells them to do and that American citizens are on their side and want them to get rid of all illegal citizens that are in the country, Then they discuss where the policy of immigration will be heading in the future and the effects that illegal immigration has on the country currently.

Sheriff: Americans want us to enforce immigration laws, Fox News, 4/10/18, https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=161&v=ohPoPiPNs1E

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sheriff: Americans want us to enforce immigration laws

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bristol County Sheriff Thomas Hodgson reacts after House passes two bills addressing illegal immigration

# data[].attributes.body
The new immigration policy that Trump is proposing to bring to the United States government may not be as beneficial financially to the American citizens and the United States equality in general. Many other countries who have more immigrants in their country than the U.S. are very successful and the economy is even better because of these immigrants. The immigrants in the United States may be beneficial to the economy and may be needed in order to keep the countries economy good and maybe even improve the economy. The tax laws and other laws of the economy may be the bigger issue at hand here than immigration.

Left fear-mongering as Trump enforces immigration laws?, Fox News, 4/10/18,  https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=397&v=aTIK2kp-N_Q

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Left fear-mongering as Trump enforces immigration laws?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tucker takes on one immigration activist as the Trump administration looks to hire thousands more officers, end 'catch-and-release' policies and begin work on president's border wall #Tucker

# data[].attributes.body
There has been much change in the immigration policy of the United Stats over its history. The policy started off very unfair and discriminatory to certain categories of immigrants. We, however, fixed the plan to allow more immigrants to migrate into the United States. Change in these policies can be seen in the near future with the election of the new President Donald Trump who would like to limit immigration and illegal immigrants in the United States

U.S. Immigration Since 1965, History Channel, 4/10/18, https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=200&v=ZBSZwde070c

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What does an American look like? Evolving immigration policies in 1965 would lead to ever-changing answers. Subscribe for more HISTORY: http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=historychannel Check out exclusive HISTORY content: Website - http://www.history.com Google+ - https://plus.google.com/+HISTORY/posts Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/History Twitter - https://twitter.com/history HISTORY Topical Video Season 1 Episode 1 Whether you're looking for more on American Revolution battles, WWII generals, architectural wonders, secrets of the ancient world, U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is about the reduced number of refugees coming from middle eastern countries into the United States since president Trump has been in office. There have been numbers that show that more christian refugees are being accepted into the United States than Muslims. This, however, should be expected due to the fact that the United States is a predominately christian country and we would be more likely to trust someone of our own religion.

John Knefel, US Resettles More Christian Refugees Than Muslims as Overall Numbers Plummet, Truthout, 2/23/18, http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/43522-us-resettles-more-christian-refugees-than-muslims-as-overall-numbers-plummet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Trump administration has drastically reduced the number of refugees allowed into the United States, but even as overall levels fall, the country is resettling more Christians than Muslims.

According to official State Department data, numbers are down across the board for refugee resettlement, but the drop appears to be especially acute for Muslims. In 2017, 11,493 Muslim refugees were resettled, while 15,548 Christians were. As of February 7, 281 Muslim refugees have been admitted this year, compared with 1,200 Christians, continuing a trend from the first six months of Trump's time in office. Of the five countries in the world that produce the most refugees, four are majority Muslim.

As a candidate, Donald Trump promised to ban Muslims from being able to travel to the United States, a policy he has enacted as president with uneven success. Beyond Trump's own anti-Muslim rhetoric, he has attempted to stock his administration with officials who share his views, including former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

Trump's decision to close the door on refugees comes as a worldwide crisis continues to worsen, despite declining public attention. According to the United Nations, there were 22.5 million refugees worldwide at the end of 2016, the largest number since World War II.

Trump has reduced the overall number of refugees the US will allow in fiscal year 2018 to 45,000, a decrease from 2017, and a massive reduction from the 85,000 admitted in 2016, the final year of the Obama administration. Even with the dramatically reduced ceiling, the Trump administration is behind schedule, according to a recent statement by Refugee Council USA. "Six thousand seven hundred and four total refugees have arrived to the US during the first four months of [fiscal year] 2018. Approximately 15,000 refugees should have arrived to the US by January 31."

Moreover, the low number of Muslim refugees fails to express the full extent to which the Trump administration has closed off resettlement from many Muslim-majority countries. Only two Syrian refugees were admitted in January, and none were admitted in the prior two months, despite the ongoing civil war there. In total, only 28 individuals from nine Muslim-majority countries were admitted in the first month of the year.

The administration has shut the country's doors to Muslims in two separate but related ways. In addition to Trump's infamous Muslim ban, which is now on its third version and is being implemented pending an expected hearing by the Supreme Court in April, the administration announced in October it would ban refugees from 11 countries it argued posed special "security" risks, even as it resumed admitting refugees from other countries.

That decision triggered court challenges by human rights advocates. At the end of January, the administration said it would resume allowing in refugees from those 11 countries, which it hasn't confirmed publicly. According to Reuters, which first obtained a government memo listing the countries, they are Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Mali, North Korea, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

Whether the Trump administration is actively favoring Christian refugees is unclear, though a recent nomination to a key position would give that impression. Trump recently tapped Ken Isaacs, a vice president at the Christian relief organization Samaritan's Purse, to head the UN-run International Organization for Migration. Isaacs has a history of making Islamophobic comments and has said Christian refugees should be prioritized over Muslims, as reported by The Washington Post. (The State Department didn't offer an on-the-record comment about whether the Trump administration prioritizes Christians over Muslims when asked by Truthout. Instead, a department spokesperson requested anonymity to provide an official statement, which Truthout is refusing to grant.)

What is clear, though, according to refugee advocates, is that the Trump administration is deliberately targeting Muslims seeking resettlement in the United States.

"Unequivocally, yes, this is a discriminatory policy," Ashley Houghton, tactical campaigns manager at Amnesty International, told Truthout. "We know this because the president said he would ban Muslims from the United States, and then he did. You cannot separate deeply disturbing language from deeply disturbing policy."

Betsy Fisher, policy director at the International Refugee Assistance Project, says Trump's policies after one year show an obvious anti-Muslim bias.

"The numbers speak for themselves," Fisher told Truthout. "After suspending refugee resettlement entirely for 120 days, the administration's refugee restrictions from October 24 targeted nationals from 11 countries in particular, nine of which are predominantly Muslim."

"We don't think that it's a coincidence that the president, who has vilified Muslims time and time again, wants to impose ever tighter restrictions on refugees from Muslim-majority countries," Fisher added.

Even if all of Trump's bans and restrictions were somehow lifted immediately, his administration's policies would still have lasting impact for individuals abroad waiting for admittance to the United States. The process is long and complicated, and often involves multiple sign-offs from sub-agencies and departments across the executive branch. In some cases, those approvals are time-sensitive, so regular bureaucratic sloth can result in a case that has been green-lit going back into the waiting pile if one agency takes too long to sign off.

Plus, the government works with nine separate agencies to resettle refugees, and with dramatically fewer refugees being admitted, some agencies themselves are strugglin g. "We're shuttering off refugees from entering the United States, through these series of bans, which makes it harder for resettlement agencies to stay alive, which makes it harder to resettle refugees in the future," said Houghton.

The result is confusion and uncertainty among those waiting to hear whether or not they will be approved by the government. Even victories can be fleeting, as the back-and-forth decisions and judicial orders on the Muslim ban prove. The administration's decision to lift its ban on refugees from the 11 countries it listed last year was a victory for advocates, but what the new screening procedures will look like isn't clear, and whether or not the administration will fully restart the resettlement process is far from certain.

"We have challenged this new refugee ban in court and won," said Fisher. "Now we have to make sure the government actually follows through and resumes refugee resettlement."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
US Resettles More Christian Refugees Than Muslims as Overall Numbers Plummet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Trump administration has drastically reduced the number of refugees allowed into the United States, but even as overall levels fall, the country is resettling more Christians than Muslims. According to official State Department data, numbers are down across the board for refugee resettlement, but the drop appears to be especially acute for Muslims. In 2017, 11,493 Muslim refugees were resettled, while 15,548 Christians were.

# data[].attributes.body
President Trump speaks about how his new immigration policy will not only make immigration simpler and still keep unwanted illegal immigrants out of the country but it will also save money for the American citizens. This plan will allow immigrants to apply to come into the country and will be a safer process than the current one. This act, called the raise act, also denies new immigrants the right to collect welfare as soon as they come into the country.

Trump announces new immigration policy, Washington Post, 4/10/18,  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFxZejzNCrw

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Trump announced the Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment (RAISE) Act on Aug. 2, which aims to cut immigration by half from the current level of more than 1 million green cards granted per year.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is about the proposal of a bill into the United States government that would reduce legal immigration by about 25%. This bill would also limit how legal immigrants have been able to get relatives into the country and also end the lottery system that gets legal immigrants into the United States from diverse countries.

House GOP leaders struggle to push immigration bill, Daily News, 2/23/18, http://www.nydailynews.com/newswires/news/national/house-gop-leaders-struggle-push-immigration-bill-article-1.3824557

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WASHINGTON (AP) - As badly as things have gone for immigration legislation in the Senate, it's not looking any easier in the more conservative House.

Republican leaders there are scrambling to find enough GOP votes to pass a measure that's even more restrictive than a proposal by President Donald Trump that flopped spectacularly in the Senate on Thursday. Compounding those divisions are pressures from some of the House's most conservative members, who are casting the effort as a pivotal test for Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis.

"It is a, the, defining moment for this speaker," said Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C. who leads the hard-right House Freedom Caucus, which helped force former Speaker John Boehner from his job in 2015. "If he gets it wrong, it will have consequences for him but it will also have consequences for the rest of the Republican Party."

Ryan aides did not respond to a request for comment on Meadows' remark. But underscoring party rifts, some Republicans defended the speaker and his work on the issue.

"Any time you allow one member or a small group of members to dictate overall policy for the country, it is an unfair scenario," Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif., who's opposing the conservative legislation, said Friday. "I just don't think our speaker's going to give into any type of threats."

Even if House leaders manage to push the measure through their chamber, it would be dead on arrival in the closely divided Senate. Democrats there could ensure its demise because any immigration measure would need 60 votes to survive, meaning bipartisan agreement is mandatory.

All of that underscores how unlikely it is that Congress will approve sweeping election-year legislation on the subject, including something to help young "Dreamer" immigrants stay in the U.S.

The divisions bode poorly for a bill by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, that conservatives back and leaders have said they'd try bringing to a House vote.

The measure would provide only temporary protections for Dreamers, young immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children who still lack permanent authority to live in this country. Trump offered a chance for citizenship for 1.8 million of them.

The bill would provide money for the border wall with Mexico that Trump wants. And like Trump's plan, it would limit the relatives that legal immigrants could sponsor for citizenship and end a lottery that distributes visas to people from diverse countries.

But it goes further.

It reduces legal immigration by about 25 percent annually and requires employers to use the online E-Verify program to validate that their workers are legal. It withholds federal grants from "sanctuary cities" that don't help federal agents catch immigrants in the U.S. illegally and would make it easier to deport immigrants in the country illegally who are gang members or have been arrested repeatedly for drunk driving.

House Democrats uniformly oppose the proposal. So to succeed Republicans must supply 216 votes - a simple majority in a chamber with four vacant seats.

The bill has been embraced by the White House, but GOP leaders are encountering opposition from suburban moderates who consider the bill too harsh and whose voters could punish them in this fall's elections. In addition, Republicans from districts that rely on seasonal foreign agriculture or tourism workers say its visa standards are too restrictive, while some conservatives say it's too lenient and shouldn't help Dreamers.

"That bill is a dead man walking," said Rep. Carlos Curbelo, R-Fla., who predicted its defeat should a vote occur. "It's designed to appease fringe elements in our society," he said, citing its failure to establish a citizenship process for Dreamers and other restrictions.

GOP leaders have said they'll hold a roll call once the measure has enough votes to pass, and haven't ruled out making changes to win support. The earliest possible vote would be after Congress returns from next week's recess.

Meadows said Friday that despite the Senate's stalemate over immigration, "It is critically important that we demonstrate a conservative solution" that protects Dreamers from deportation. He said he believed that Trump's support for immigration legislation would eventually result in "more concessions" from senators.

There are other House immigration bills, including a compromise measure by Reps. Will Hurd, R-Texas, and Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., that resembles one measure the Senate rejected Thursday. Ryan is considered unlikely to bring immigration legislation to the floor not backed by most Republicans.

One possible fallback is temporarily extending Dreamers' protections for a year in exchange for some money for border security.

"I think we'll address the issue at some point in some way," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told a reporter Friday when asked about the possibility of such a temporary extension.

Dreamers, brought to the U.S. illegally as children, have temporary protection under the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. Trump said in September he's ending the program but gave Congress until March 5 to revive it, though federal courts have temporarily required him to continue its protections.

___

AP reporter Andrew Taylor contributed.

Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Send a Letter to the Editor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
House GOP leaders struggle to push immigration bill

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
WASHINGTON (AP) - As badly as things have gone for immigration legislation in the Senate, it's not looking any easier in the more conservative House. Republican leaders there are scrambling to find enough GOP votes to pass a measure that's even more restrictive than a proposal by President Donald Trump that flopped spectacularly in the Senate on Thursday.

# data[].attributes.body
Us lifts ban on refugees from 11 countries, DH, 4/10/18, http://www.deccanherald.com/content/656671/us-lifts-ban-refugees-11.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Agence France-Presse, Washington, Jan 30 2018, 8:02 IST

The 11 countries, hit with a ban in October in the Trump administration's revised refugee policy, have not been identified officially. file photo

The United States announced Monday it was lifting its ban on refugees from 11 "high-risk" countries, but said those seeking to enter the US would come under much tougher scrutiny than in the past.

Applicants from 11 countries, unnamed but understood to include 10 Muslim-majority nations plus North Korea, will face tougher "risk-based" assessments to be accepted.

"It's critically important that we know who is entering the United States," said Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen.

"These additional security measures will make it harder for bad actors to exploit our refugee program, and they will ensure we take a more risk-based approach to protecting the homeland."

The 11 countries, hit with a ban in October in the Trump administration's revised refugee policy, have not been identified officially.

But refugee groups say they comprise Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Mali, North Korea, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

Speaking anonymously, a senior administration official told journalists that the policy of enhanced security assessments for the 11 countries was not designed to target Muslims.

"Our admissions have nothing to do with religion," the official said, adding that there is "nothing especially novel" about tougher screening for countries deemed to have a higher level of risk.

Donald Trump has pursued a much tougher stance on immigrants and refugees from all countries since becoming president one year ago.

His predecessor Barack Obama set refugee admission in fiscal 2017, which began on October 2016, at 110,000.

When Trump took office a year ago, he slashed that to 53,000, a number that was cut again to a maximum of 45,000 in fiscal 2018.

But refugee arrivals this year could come in significantly lower than that, due to the backlog from the 120-day halt and a slowdown in processing because of generally tougher applicant reviews.

DHS would not explain what the tougher vetting measures for the 11 countries would include.

But all applicants are being asked to supply more detailed histories and evidence of their past activities, and many are having to allow access to personal electronics and social media accounts.

The move comes as Trump presses for a sharp turn in overall US immigration policy that critics say will result in a 50 percent cut in arrivals each year and bias admissions away from African, Asian and Muslim countries.

Last week, Trump proposed to end the 27-year-old "green card lottery" program that aims to diversify the source of immigrants, leading to an upturn in those from Middle Eastern and African countries.

He also proposed to tightly limit the family members who can join immigrants to only spouses and younger children. Until now, such "chain migration" could extend to immigrants' parents, grandparents, siblings and extended family.

The White House said the policy was necessary to protect national security from terror and crime threats.

In return, Trump proposed a plan that offers 1.8 million young unauthorized immigrants known as "Dreamers" a path to citizenship over 10-12 years.

Democrats and Republicans are starting negotiations on those proposals, along with Trump's request for a $25 billion "trust fund" to build a wall on the southern US border to deter illegal border-crossers from Mexico.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
US lifts ban on refugees from 11 countries

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Agence France-Presse, Washington, Jan 30 2018, 8:02 IST The 11 countries, hit with a ban in October in the Trump administration's revised refugee policy, have not been identified officially. file photo The United States announced Monday it was lifting its ban on refugees from 11 "high-risk" countries, but said those seeking to enter the US would come under much tougher scrutiny than in the past.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is about a group of young immigrants who are in the middle of the citizenship process and are going to be deported most likely if the bill does pass. This is a very controversial topic and blame is being thrown around between parties and politicians everywhere right now.

Calvin Woodard, Trump on Collapse of Immigration Effort, La Crosse Tribune, 2/23/18, http://lacrossetribune.com/news/national/govt-and-politics/ap-fact-check-trump-on-collapse-of-immigration-effort/article_848bfaea-c808-505f-b7b9-e8676e349ae7.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Donald Trump is blaming Democrats for abandoning the young immigrants whose legal status is up in the air because of a step he took six months ago.

Those immigrants, who arrived in the United States illegally as children, became a bargaining chip in legislation that collapsed this past week as Trump sought tougher border enforcement and limits on legal immigration, proposing steps that many Republicans as well as Democrats would not support. On other fronts, Trump struck off notes on the economy and the price tag of wars.

A look at a sampling of recent statements:

TRUMP: "Cannot believe how BADLY DACA recipients have been treated by the Democrats...totally abandoned! Republicans are still working hard." - tweet Friday.

THE FACTS: Regardless of fault in the legislative wrangling, the "Dreamers" were put on notice in September about their potential legal jeopardy when Trump announced his administration would end DACA - the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Trump gave Congress six months to come up with a legislative solution and used that as an opportunity to get money for his border wall and other steps on immigration.

Several bills came forward that would have protected the young immigrants and strengthened border security; all failed. Hanging that all on Democrats is problematic. The bill patterned after Trump's immigration priorities was the least popular, defeated by 60 votes with only 39 in favor. More than one-quarter of his fellow Republicans abandoned him and voted against the measure.

It would have provided a chance for citizenship for 1.8 million young immigrants, a Democratic priority, while including $25 billion for the border wall, tighter curbs on relatives whom legal immigrants could sponsor for citizenship and an end to a visa lottery that encourages immigration from diverse nations.

The young immigrants are in limbo as a March 5 deadline approaches. Federal courts have blocked Trump from ending the program on that date but the immigrants face growing risks of deportation as their protections expire.

TRUMP: "Black unemployment is at the lowest level in history. Hispanic unemployment is at the lowest level in recorded history, which is really something that's so great." - remarks to state and local officials at the White House on Monday.

THE FACTS: Wrong on both counts. Trump was citing outdated numbers. Ten days earlier, the government reported the black jobless rate jumped nearly a percentage point to 7.7 percent in January, higher than most of last year and barely below the 7.8 percent of January 2017 when Trump took office. It indeed hit a record low of 6.8 percent a month earlier.

Hispanic unemployment also rose in January, though marginally. The rate stood at 5 percent, up from 4.9 percent the month before and from the record low of 4.8 percent seen in April 2006 and several months last year.

The next day, Trump accurately cast the record on black joblessness in the past tense: "We had the lowest African-American unemployment rate in the history of our country."

Jobless figures for blacks and Hispanics can jump around from month to month, such that any record can be short-lived. The unemployment rate for whites is consistently much lower than for the other groups, now 3.5 percent.

TRUMP: "I do have to say that we do have a pool of 100 million people, of which some of them - many of them - want to work; they want to have a job. A lot of them do better not working, frankly, under the laws. And people don't like to talk about it. But you're competing against government. And they have great potential. They sort of want to work, but they're making less if they work than if they stay home and do other things. So we have to address that situation. That's a big problem. But we have a pool of 100 million people, a lot of whom want to work." - meeting with lawmakers Tuesday about trade.

THE FACTS: "Some of them" is true. But that's not true for most.

Out of Trump's pool of 100 million (actually 95.7 million, according to the government), only about 5.2 million say they want to be working. The vast majority is made up of students age 16 and over, the elderly and people who want to stay home to raise their children. That information comes from the same government survey used to calculate the unemployment rate.

The economy is already considered to be close to full employment, meaning it's harder to find workers to fill new jobs - harder still if Trump succeeds in curbing immigration.

Few economists blame social programs keeping large numbers of people at home and out of work, as Trump appeared to do. Instead, recent economic research suggests opioid addiction is a key reason many Americans can't get or keep jobs. And past episodes of widespread imprisonment are also a factor: Having a criminal conviction makes it hard for people to find work once they are out of jail.

TRUMP: "This will be a big week for Infrastructure. After so stupidly spending $7 trillion in the Middle East, it is now time to start investing in OUR Country!" - tweet Monday.

TRUMP: "I said this morning as of a couple months ago, we have spent $7 trillion in the Middle East - $7 trillion. What a mistake. ... $7 trillion in the Middle East, and the Middle East is far worse now than it was 17 years ago when they went in." - remarks at White House infrastructure event.

THE FACTS: There's a lot wrong with his $7 trillion figure. First, he's using an inflated estimate on the cost of wars. Second, he's referring in part to predicted costs going decades into the future, not money that's all been "spent."

Third, some of the spending he calls a "mistake" reflects his own policy decisions. It finances the military effort he brags about against Islamic State militants and his continuing push for U.S. aims in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq. He's added a few thousand troops in Afghanistan and committed the U.S. to remaining there indefinitely.

The Pentagon estimates that wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria have directly cost U.S. taxpayers more than $1.5 trillion. To be sure, actual costs are higher.

Boston University political scientist Neta C. Crawford, as co-director of the Costs of War Project at Brown University, estimated that as of September, U.S. wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria - plus additional spending on homeland security, the Pentagon and Veterans Affairs Department since the 2001 terrorist attacks - cost more than $4.3 trillion.

That rises to an estimated $5.6 trillion or more when anticipated future spending on veterans and other factors related to the wars so far are added.

Although that's an expensive commitment, it's far short of the $6 trillion or $7 trillion that Trump has been citing for several years, first as a candidate, then president. Even scholarly estimates involve ballpark projections, not just money that is gone.

Associated Press writers Robert Burns, Christopher Rugaber and Josh Boak contributed to this report.

Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AP FACT CHECK: Trump on collapse of immigration effort

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Donald Trump is blaming Democrats for abandoning the young immigrants whose legal status is up in the air because of a step he took six months ago.

# data[].attributes.body
Trump has the chance to actually put his immigration policies and views in place which will greatly restrict the number of people who will be immigrating to the United States in hopes to better the economy and make the country a safer place. This is huge in the government today and compromise like this is not happening often and not on this scale. Trumps plan can be put into effect and hopefully will be used to better the country as a whole not only to better the immigration policy.

Jeremy Peters, Trump Gets What He Wants in Immigration Debate: Quiet on the Right, The New York Times, 4/10/18, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/15/us/politics/conservatives-immigration-trump.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This approach has benefits for Mr. Trump and his party. The president keeps a key campaign promise by not agreeing to anything his base would consider too lenient.

He avoids an assault from the conservative news media, which called him names like " Amnesty Don " after he showed signs of flexibility.

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Republican who has been a frequent target of the right for trying to broker bipartisan agreements on immigration, said the current debate was noticeably lacking in the bitterness that had so easily whipped up against Republicans in the past.

"That's just on the margins now," he said. "Trump introduced a 1.8 million-person pathway to citizenship. And it's hard to get to his right on this stuff."

And if the efforts in the Senate to pass a deal go nowhere, that saves vulnerable incumbent Republicans in the House from having to take a difficult vote and risk a primary challenge from the right. Before the end of March, 25 states have filing deadlines for House and Senate races, leaving ample time for conservative challengers to emerge.

"There are no profiles in courage during filing season," said Richard F. Hohlt, a veteran Republican consultant. "If you're up there - in the House especially - you're saying, 'Why do I want to get in the middle of this debate if I don't have to?'"

"It's all about the self-interest of the members," he added.

In the 32 years since the nation's immigration laws were last overhauled, efforts to take another run at it have followed a predictable dead-end path. Both times the Senate voted on immigration legislation since - in 2006, at President George W. Bush's urging, and seven years later, when Barack Obama was in the White House - the majority of Republicans in the chamber voted no.

Senator James Lankford, a conservative Republican from Oklahoma who has been trying to bring together the divergent factions in his party and resolve the status of the young immigrants, known as Dreamers, said he found the repeated failure to address such a glaring problem incredibly frustrating.

"It's not that it hasn't been something obvious to everyone," he said. "It's that Congress has been unwilling to address it."

"For 20 years, there have been groups that have pushed us apart, saying don't talk," he added.

There are several factors that make proponents of a compromise hopeful that this time is different, though they acknowledge the odds are against that. First is the pressure of a deadline. Mr. Trump has said that he will let legal protections for the Dreamers expire on March 5, and the Senate has a self-imposed end-of-the-week deadline to write legislation.

With the exception of a small group of hard-liners on the right, conservatives agree that Congress should do something to save the Dreamers from living with the constant fear of deportation.

And absent an agreement now, it is difficult to see how Mr. Trump would ultimately achieve any of the demands in his plan, like billions in funding for his border wall and an end to the visa program known as the diversity lottery, which allows in immigrants from countries that do not send many people to the United States. Mr. Trump has called it a glaring loophole for potentially dangerous immigrants.

"These conservatives who say they're so worried about terrorism, this should be a no-brainer," said Travis Korson, a Republican consultant who is working to push more Republicans to agree on a Dreamer solution.

Evangelical groups are now pressing lawmakers to reach a solution, giving the issue the imprimatur of one of the most important constituencies in the conservative coalition.

In a letter to Mr. Trump and members of Congress last week, dozens of church leaders called for action. "The Bible speaks clearly and repeatedly to God's love and concern for the vulnerable," they wrote, "and also challenges us to think beyond our nationality, ethnicity or religion when loving our neighbor."

Alex Conant, a Republican strategist who was an adviser to Senator Marco Rubio of Florida when Mr. Rubio was pilloried by the right for helping write a comprehensive immigration overhaul in 2013, noted that with Republicans in control of the White House and both houses of Congress, there may not be a better opportunity for years.

Mr. Trump, he said, "could become the first president since Reagan to fix immigration."

"He has the chance to sign something historic," Mr. Conant added. "And if I were advising him that's what I'd tell him to do. But I'm not advising him. Stephen Miller is." (Mr. Miller is the senior policy adviser who, perhaps more than anyone else at the White House, has been a check on the president's impulses to consider a deal that is less restrictive.)

In many ways, the Republican Party is still stuck in the same debate it has been having for a generation over law and order versus "amnesty," a generic term many on the right have used to describe plans that would provide legal status or citizenship to anyone here illegally.

It was not always such a loaded term. Speaking in 1984, President Ronald Reagan described his views this way: "I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and who have lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally."

But with the election of a president who ran on the most restrictive immigration platform in modern times, the reality for the Republican Party under Mr. Trump is more difficult than it was under Reagan, who still elicits disapproval from conservatives who believe he gave too much away in the immigration overhaul of 1986.

"We have gone through this before with President Reagan, and we have been suffering the consequences since," said Jenny Beth Martin, a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots.

"Prove to us that you are worthy of our trust," she added, "and then come back and talk to us about how we deal with people who are entering this country illegally."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump Gets What He Wants in Immigration Debate: Quiet on the Right

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This approach has benefits for Mr. Trump and his party. The president keeps a key campaign promise by not agreeing to anything his base would consider too lenient. He avoids an assault from the conservative news media, which called him names like " Amnesty Don " after he showed signs of flexibility.