Trump immigration megathread

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I love how the media keeps presuming/insisting/demanding that there is only one compromise immigration proposal. The same 2006/2007/2013 trash.

The minute the word compromise is mentioned, they go to that same bill basically written by three Senators, two of whom are now deceased (Arlen Specter and Ted Kennedy). Even Fox News did this with Charles Krauthammer referring to it as a gold standard (using different terminology about an alien coming from mars to design a perfect plan).

In the old days, compromise meant you sit down with Trump, Cotton and whoever else on the one side, and some Democrats on the other side. And you hammer out a deal between the two sides. A good part of the reason why compromise doesn't work anymore, is because for so long, it became basically whatever some open-borders Republican wrote with Ted Kennedy, then was shoved down your throat by the establishment. And that is a good reason it failed, because it contained the same old wink and nod of security in exchange legalization, meanwhile the illegal poker game in the back room no one talks about is the massive increases in legal immigration. And in most cases, the things that ended up killing those bills was the rebellion by working class independents and even some Democrats (in 2007) against that arrangement.

A compromise is a deal between the "current players" on "BOTH" sides of a giving issue. A deal between Trump and the Democrats would be an actual compromise on immigration. And that may look something like a wall+legal status+reductions in legal immigration.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

  Just a few years back there was a small core of Dem senators who were for less immigration, not too big on amnesty etc, such as Dorgan, Byrd, Nelson (of Nebraska) and even Harry Reid in his 90's version.  Now, I wonder if only Manchin would fit that description.   

Baucus, Bayh, Bingaman, Brown, Byrd, Dorgan, Harkin, Landrieu, McCaskil, Nelson, Pryor, Rockefeller, Sanders, Stabenow, Tester, and Webb all Democrats who voted against the 2007 immigration bill.

In 2013, Baucus, Brown, Harkin, Landrieu, McCaskil, Pryor, Rockefeller, Sanders, Stabenow and Tester, all voted in favor of the Gang of Eight bill. The others had left the Senate. Manchin also voted in favor, as did Donnelly and Heitkamp.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My point is that the worst possible outcome is giving legal legitimacy to a class of permanent non-citizen residents. A liberal democracy should not have that. There are a variety of ways to respond to the problem, from mass deportations to sanctions to full amnesty, but having people living in the country permanently without full political rights is as untenable as the status quo. No adult should be living in this country indefinitely unless he or she is either working toward citizenship or meeting the obligations of citizenship. If there is one thing that Democratic representatives should not compromise on, it is this.

Because less and less compromise is obviously what is necessary here.

How about legal permanent residency, but with the option for citizenship only open if they go back to their home country first?