GOP senators say they're getting closer on bipartisan DACA fix

http://thehill.com/video/367639-gop-...tisan-daca-fix

Key GOP senators tell The Hill that a bipartisan Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) compromise is "very close" but both sides must convince their respective colleagues to back a narrowly focused deal.

Arizona GOP Sen. Jeff Flake said that “the small group that's been meeting - myself, and [Sens.] Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Mike Bennet (D-Colo.), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) - we’re very close,” to striking a deal to take care of the nearly 800,000 undocumented immigrants granted DACA protected status because their parents brought them to the country.

Flake added, “now we've got to sell that to more of our colleagues, but that small bipartisan group is very close.”

Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) was also optimistic.

"I think there's a compromise that can be worked out that includes interior enforcement, includes border security, and, the legalization of of those kids,” he told The Hill.

Veteran Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), who is “privy” to the talks, called them “serious negotiations” and a chance for true bipartisanship in the next Congress.

"I'm hoping that we are going to try to work together for the first time this Congress in a bipartisan way, if we can then this might be the way to do it,” Shelby told The Hill, referring to a deal on DACA.

Flake - a member of the Judiciary Committee who opted not to run for reelection this year - said he looks forward to a Tuesday meeting with bipartisan lawmakers at the White House. He did not attend a GOP-only planning meeting there on Thursday because of its exclusivity, he said.

“We are out of time,” he told The Hill. Republicans need to quit fooling themselves “that we can get this thing done ourselves … we can’t.”

Any DACA fix will need at least 60 votes to pass in the Senate. Republicans now hold a 51-49 majority in that chamber.

Several bipartisan groups of lawmakers have scrambled to beat President Trump’s March deadline to come up with a legislative DACA fix. Many of them indicate that a deal would include some border security - but, Flake warns that a deal will be narrowly focused on helping the nearly 800,000 undocumented immigrants who are now at risk of losing their protected status.

Matters such as so-called “chain migration" would only be part of a deal “as it relates to the parents of DACA kids - they shouldn't be able to sponsor their parents, who brought them across illegally - but dealing with, you know chain migration for the broader population, isn't going to happen in this bill … we're not going to be able to do things like sanctuary cities, or you know, other broader issues; that's step two,” Flake said.

Watch the video above to hear the senators in their own words.

Sounds good to me. I'm just anxiously waiting for Trump's meeting on Tuesday.

Only daca ppl?? D:

Any word yet if a bill would be voted on its own before Jan. 19 or added to the spending bill?

https://www.axios.com/trump-insists-...522722483.html

Maybe I'm reading into this too much but Trump didn't mention chain migration in this quote. The lottery and border security (which is what even GOPers hope the wall means) seem very workable and in line with Flake's proposal. Hopefully Democrats give in a little.

Nope, Dems would be stupid not to add it to the spending bill, there's a huge chance that Trump would veto a standalone bill just for lulz.

yeah because he will only get Border Security and the end of the lottery program.

no way hes ending chain migration or getting the wall.

I think that's just semantics.

No official word but I really feel like at this moment, the Dems are truly serious about holding their ground. Not because they care that much but because their progressive base terrifies them.

Give Trump 33B for wall/border security, limit sponsorship of DREAMers, and end DV: sounds like a deal.

Just add it to the spending bill, and we're good to go.

With the DREAM Act rather than the conservative versions, maybe the Democrats would go for it.