Demoncraps were going to sneak in a new immigration amnesty for illegal aliens by putting it in a appropriation bill that can be passed by a simple majority vote of ‘reconciling’ the differences of a bill supposedly already passed by both houses of Congress.


Senate parliamentarian deals blow to Democrats’ immigration plan

Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough on Sunday dealt a significant blow to Democrats’ plan to provide 8 million green cards as part of a sweeping spending package, warning it doesn’t comply with tight rules that determine what can be in the bill.

MacDonough’s guidance, a copy of which was obtained by The Hill, likely closes the door to Democrats using the spending bill to provide a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants.

MacDonough, in her guidance, called the Democratic plan “by any standard a broad, new immigration policy.”

“The policy changes of this proposal far outweigh the budgetary impact scored to it and it is not appropriate for inclusion in reconciliation,” she wrote in the ruling obtained by The Hill.

Democrats pitched MacDonough earlier this month on their plan to use the $3.5 trillion spending bill to provide 8 million green cards for four groups of immigrants: “Dreamers,” temporary protected status (TPS) holders, agricultural workers and essential workers. Getting legal permanent resident status allows an individual to eventually apply for citizenship if they can meet other qualifications.

But because Democrats are using reconciliation to pass the spending bill without GOP support, there are strict requirements for what can be included. One of the requirements is that any provision in the bill has to impact the federal government’s spending or revenues and that the impact can’t be “merely incidental” to nonbudgetary intentions.

But MacDonough, in her written guidance to senators, wrote that granting LPR status has “no federal fiscal equivalent.”

“Changing the law to clear the way to LPR status is tremendous and enduring policy change that dwarfs its budgetary impact,” she added.

Democratic leaders had previously vowed that even if the Senate referee, who is a former immigration lawyer, initially ruled against them, they could try to sway MacDonough up until the $3.5 trillion spending bill is on the Senate floor, but they didn’t immediately weigh in on the ruling Sunday night.

Democrats were optimistic that MacDonough would greenlight including their immigration plan in the spending bill because it would increase budget deficits by $139 billion over a 10-year period, according to initial estimates they’ve received from the Congressional Budget Office.

But Republicans also argued to MacDonough that immigration reform was outside the lines of what could be passed under reconciliation, which allows Democrats to avoid a GOP filibuster in the Senate.

“Immigration is way outside the bounds of what ought to be included,” Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican, told The Hill.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, tweeted on Sunday night that “everyone knew, including Ds, this would be [the] outcome.”

Outside groups supportive of using the spending bill to pass immigration reform argued that this was the first step in the process and not a nail in the coffin for getting some changes into the spending bill.

“We anticipated this would be a multistep, iterative process with multiple bites at the apple,” said FWD.us President Todd Schulte. “We continue to be confident that the ability for people to adjust status will be passed through the reconciliation process given the clear and substantial budgetary and economic impact.”

If Democrats can’t sway MacDonough, they’ll need to either leave the immigration language out of the spending bill or muster the 60 votes needed to keep it in. With Republicans opposed to using the spending package to pass immigration reform, that’s unlikely.

Democrats are also likely to face fresh calls to nix the legislative filibuster, which would let them pass immigration reform and other priorities with a simple majority outside reconciliation, as well as to try to formally overrule MacDonough on the floor in a move that would take total unity from Democrats and Vice President Harris presiding or to fire her outright.

MacDonough previously ruled against Democrats’ plan to include a $15 minimum wage in a coronavirus bill earlier this year as well as a 2017 ObamaCare repeal plan.

During a meeting with Democratic staffers last week, MacDonough asked for more information on the legal theory behind their proposal. Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), the No. 2 Senate Democrat and Judiciary Committee chairman, indicated last week that Democrats were still optimistic.

“We feel very strong about that position, and we hope it is persuasive,” he said of the Democrats’ legal justification. “But ultimately it is her decision.”