After a month of waiting for news on immigration provisions in the budget
reconciliation bill, the Congressional Budget Office is now reviewing
Plan C—also called the "Parole In Place Plan—in order to estimate its costs.
After that, the next step is to submit it to the Senate parliamentarian,
Elizabeth McDonough, who has rejected the previous two
immigration plans proposed by Senate Democrats.
Stay tuned because we are going to
cover all of this news and the likelihood of this option passing
and when we can expect Democrats to submit this plan to McDonough.
By the way, I was unable to post a video last week, but we are back now.
If you have been waiting for an update then please like this video
so that other people can get a chance to see it.
As we discussed in a recent video, granting certain undocumented individuals
parole status was the backup option for Senate Democrats
if the parliamentarian rejected their original pathway to citizenship.
Granting parole to millions of essential workers,
Dreamers, TPS holders, and farmworkers would allow them to apply
for five year work permits and subsequent renewals, and would also shield them
from being deported.
It would also give them
a durable, long term protection that would be a relief for those with DACA
or TPS who have had to live their lives two years at a time.
Note that it does not include a pathway
to legalization, but would reportedly allow those with U.S.
citizen relatives to apply for a green card.
According to initial estimates, approximately 7.1
million people would qualify for parole status.
There won't be much information available
about who qualifies and what they will receive
until the proposal is released from the Congressional Budget Office,
but I will do another video to explain it more detail
once more information is available, so be sure to subscribe
if you haven't done so yet.
So what is the likelihood of parole passing the parliamentarian?
This depends on whether or not granting parole to undocumented non-citizens passes
the Byrd Rule, a rule named after the late Senator Robert Byrd, which determines
whether or not a measure can be included in budget reconciliation.
The first part of the Byrd rule is that the policy must impact the federal budget.
Both of the previous
pathway to citizenship proposals met this requirement.
The second and more difficult part of the Byrd rule is that the budget
impact outweighs the policy impact—a rule known as the "merely incidental test."
This is the hurdle
that both of the previous proposals from Senate Democrats failed to pass.
The merely incidental test is subject to the parliamentarian's interpretation,
and Elizabeth McDonough raised three main concerns
when she rejected Plan A and Plan B for the pathway to citizenship.
One, that it would create a new pathway to status.
Two, that a pathway to citizenship contains life changing benefits.
And three, that a future Congress could revoke the protections
through reconciliation.
Fortunately, parole addresses each of these concerns.
First, it does not create a pathway to permanent status.
It has been a part of immigration law since 1952, so it is not a new process.
Second, it comes with limitations that distinguish it from green cards,
such as the fact that parole recipients must still apply for work permits
on a case by case basis, they must request permission to travel,
and they cannot sponsor family members or others for permanent residence.
And finally, parole is a temporary status that Congress could revoke anyway,
so it avoids setting a "dangerous precedent"
in the same way a pathway to citizenship might.
This means that parole addresses all of the objections
that the parliamentarian had to the previous two proposals,
giving it a better chance of being approved.
But what about the path of citizenship?
Could still be included if Senate parliamentarian is overruled?
This is probably the last major chance at immigration reform for years to come,
so dozens of progressive House Democrats are calling on Senate leaders
to disregard the parliamentarian's decision and include
a pathway to citizenship in the reconciliation package anyway.
Last week, 39 House members wrote a letter to Senate Majority Leader
Chuck Schumer, arguing that the Senate's presiding officer
have the authority to issue a binding decision on the parliamentarian opinion,
which could then be overruled by a super majority.
In this case, the presiding officer could be Vice President Kamala Harris,
Senator Patrick Leahy, or someone designated by Senator Leahy.
One of the letter's
signatories, Illinois Representative Jesus Garcia, is quoted as saying
"This should be a wake up call
for Democrats in the Senate, that the parliamentarian
is simply an adviser and do as Republicans have done in the past:
Either put aside that ruling or fire the parliamentarian...
That can get us immigration reform." Will Senate Democrats vote
to overrule the parliamentarian?
If not, do you think she will approve parole
when it is proposed to her this week or not?
Leave me a comment and let me know.
Assistance for undocumented immigrants is not the only immigration reform
Senate Democrats are trying to include in this budget reconciliation bill.
They are also proposing Congress to recapture 200,000 employment
and family based sponsored visas and to remove the country cap exemptions
for legal immigrants.
If you have not seen my previous video
on the subject, then I will post it right here.
I will also continue releasing new videos as more information becomes available,
so make sure to subscribe and like this video to keep following me for updates.
Check this video out and I'll see you there!