Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Infrastructure category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Infrastructure’ Category

President Trump hasn’t been bashful in calling Nancy Pelosi the “Republicans’ secret weapon” in the 2018 election. Perhaps the President needs to rethink that opinion. It isn’t that Pelosi has quickly gotten popular. She’s still as unpopular as ants at a picnic. It’s that Chuck Schumer’s popularity has taken a significant dip recently.

The latest Quinnipiac University Poll “found that 53 percent of voters approve of the job the minority leader is doing in the Senate, while 35 percent do not approve. That is the lowest approval rating Schumer has received since 1999, just months after he was first elected to the U.S. Senate.”

Sen. Schumer is a major drag on battleground state Democrats. How many Democrat senators he’ll hurt remains to be seen but his decisions have already contributed to the Democrats’ vulnerable situation going into 2018. The #SchumerShutdown hurt immensely. The only thing that’s hurt Democrats more was unanimously rejecting the Trump/GOP tax cuts. As a result, Democrats should consider a net loss of less than 5 seats in the Senate a moral victory.

The latest Democrat mistake is rejecting President Trump’s immigration plan. The Common Sense Coalition’s plan isn’t serious about border security, which I explained in this post:

On Pg. 51 of the amendment, we learn that $1,571,000,000,000 is appropriated to build President Trump’s wall in 2018. Further, $2,500,000,000,000 is available to be appropriated in each year starting in 2019 and going through 2027. Further, the legislative language states that “the amount specified in subsection (d) for each of fiscal years 2019-2027 shall not be available for such fiscal year unless (A) the Secretary submits to Congress, not later than 60 days before the start of such fiscal year a report setting forth a description of every planned expenditure…, (B) a description of the total number of miles of security fencing… etc.

The money isn’t appropriated all at once, meaning that future congresses can stop the building of the wall. Don’t think President Trump won’t campaign against red state Democrats on that issue this fall. I’d bet the proverbial ranch that will be a major thorn in the Democrats’ sides.

Democrats shouldn’t think that they have political cover on this, either. Just because Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham and Bob Corker signed onto the bill doesn’t provide cover. It simply means the American people reject them, saying a pox on all their houses. The American people want real border security. They aren’t interested in political gamesmanship, which is what the Collins-Durbin-Graham bill was. This video is misleading:

Just $1,571,000,000 is appropriated to build the wall. The rest of the money is promised but not appropriated. Sound familiar?

Democrats are playing a risky game. Don’t bet on it turning out well for them this fall.

UPDATE: This video exposes Democrats:

Thursday night, I wrote this post about Sen. Cwodzinski’s interview with a local paper. One of the things covered was infrastructure. The reporter asked “What are your thoughts about the latest delays in the Southwest Light Rail Transit project?” Sen. Cwodzinski replied “These delays are completely unacceptable. Our state has put together the resources necessary to get this done, and now the federal government is leaving us waiting. As I said earlier though, I am very hopeful that out state and the federal government can build an effective partnership on infrastructure. Southwest LRT is the cornerstone of that, so am hopeful that we will receive the federal funds this year.”

It’s time for Sen. Cwodzinski to stop relying on wishful thinking. It’s time for him to deal with reality. Kim Crockett’s article reports that the “FTA is not recommending funding for any projects in Minnesota. The projects that have applied for federal funds are Southwest LRT, Bottineau LRT, the Metro Orange Line bus rapid transit along 35W, and the Metro Gold Line bus rapid transit in St. Paul. The FTA is limiting funding to ‘projects with existing full funding grant agreements. For the remaining projects in the CIG program, FTA is not requesting or recommending funding. Future investments in new transit projects would be funded by the localities that use and benefit from these localized projects.'”

This is a major blow to Gov. Dayton and Sen. Cwodzinski.

The Met Council, under [Gov. Dayton’s] leadership, developed a long-term transportation and housing plan that was entirely based on light rail expansion into the suburbs, with subsidized housing along the LRT to drive ridership and transform the metro area under a vision called “Thrive MSP 2040.”

The plan has been rejected by the five suburban counties in the metro area. The Legislature in 2017 withdrew its support from Southwest LRT and placed the Met Council under a quarterly audit by the Office of Legislative Auditor.

Apparently, Sen. Cwodzinski isn’t in touch with his constituents. They’ve rejected the Met Council’s vision for transportation. Seeing that, the GOP legislature pulled funding for these boondoggles, then ordered quarterly audits of the Met Council by the legislative auditor’s office. I’d consider that a harsh slap to the Met Council’s face. After watching this video, hopefully lots of people will think that the Met Council needs a harsh slap in the face:

First, my compliments to the ladies that put the video together. It’s long overdue. Well done. After watching it, I’m questioning what (if?) Gov. Dayton and Sen. Cwodzinski were thinking. Next, Sen. Cwodzinski’s constituents should ask themselves if they’re ok with unaccountable central planners making expensive decisions that dictate what types of things their cities and their neighborhoods will have.

Finally and most importantly, people should question whether they like the thought of not having a say in their neighborhood’s matters. I’m betting that they’d prefer keeping their decisions in their hands, not in the Met Council’s hands.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Apparently, Steve Cwodzinski isn’t capable of telling the truth. In this recent interview, Sen. Cwodzinski was asked “What are the biggest issues facing your district this session?” Sen. Cwodzinski’s reply was “Right now, the thing I am hearing most about from my constituents is the federal tax bill, and the increased taxes that they will pay because of it. The cap of $10,000 for deductions of state and local taxes will massively impact residents of Senate District 48. I am hopeful that both DFLers and Republicans can come together to find a way to reclassify some state taxes and restore these deductions.”

First, the truth is that everyone’s tax rates have dropped. That’s indisputable fact. Next, numerous studies have verified that the only people who will pay more in taxes are upper middle class people who itemize their deductions rather than accept the standard deduction. The chances of there being a significant number of people who fit into that category in Sen. Cwodzinski’s district is minimal. This is a DFL talking point. Period. Third, it’s important to note that people living in high tax states are paying more than people living in low tax states but that doesn’t mean that they’ll pay more in taxes next year than they’ll pay this year.

If the DFL doesn’t figure it out that we’re losing wealth to other states because of our high taxes, it won’t be long before we’re in the same sad shape as California and Illinois. The truth that the DFL has denied is that we’re losing wealth to other states in all age categories. That’s been happening for years.

This has stupidity written all over it:

What should the legislature do about the $43 million request by Gov. Mark Dayton’s administration to fix the Minnesota License and Registration System?
This is an incredibly difficult issue. If we do have the funds, and are not in a deficit, I would still like to know what other options there are. I’m not sure what choice we have other than seeing this through but have been working to see what possibilities we have.

Here’s a thought: the bureaucrats failed miserably and repeatedly. It’s time to hire a private company to fix this immediately. That $43,000,000 isn’t coming from an ATM. It’s coming from taxpayers. DFL politicians like Sen. Cwodzinski haven’t demanded accountability. They’ve essentially thrown their hands up, then thrown money at the problem in the hope of doing the same thing will produce a different result.

That’s the definition of insanity. That’s why the DFL should be stripped of its ability to govern. The DFL has earned a place on the sidelines. That starts with Gov. Dayton and continues through Sen. Cwodzinski and other DFL politicians.

What are your thoughts about the latest delays in the Southwest Light Rail Transit project?
These delays are completely unacceptable. Our state has put together the resources necessary to get this done, and now the federal government is leaving us waiting. As I said earlier though, I am very hopeful that out state and the federal government can build an effective partnership on infrastructure. Southwest LRT is the cornerstone of that, so am hopeful that we will receive the federal funds this year.

Hopefully, President Trump will prevent money from reaching boondoggles like SWLRT. Let those projects die.

Technorati: , , , ,

The Common Sense Coalition’s amendment is pretty much a bait-and-switch con job piece of legislation. For starters, amnesty for DACA recipients is immediate. That isn’t surprising. Next, building President Trump’s wall isn’t a priority. On Pg. 51 of the amendment, we learn that $1,571,000,000,000 is appropriated to build President Trump’s wall in 2018. Further, $2,500,000,000,000 is available to be appropriated in each year starting in 2019 and going through 2027. Further, the legislative language states that “the amount specified in subsection (d) for each of fiscal years 2019-2027 shall not be available for such fiscal year unless (A) the Secretary submits to Congress, not later than 60 days before the start of such fiscal year a report setting forth a description of every planned expenditure…, (B) a description of the total number of miles of security fencing… etc.

In other words, they’re limiting the speed with which the wall can be built. Further. they’re making it possible for future Democratic administrations to kill the building of the wall.

Simply put, this bill has no chance of getting 6o votes. It doesn’t stand a chance of getting signed into law, either. Here’s a picture of most of the members of the Common Sense Coalition:

It’s worth noting that a significant percentage of these senators are either retiring or will be defeated this fall. Sen. Donnelly fits that description. Jeff Flake definitely fits that description. Joe Manchin is inching closer to fitting that description. Heidi Heitkamp definitely fits that description. Claire McCaskill and Bill Nelson fit that description. The senators from New Hampshire don’t exactly fit the description but they’re getting there. Bob Corker fits that description.

Simply put, most of the senators in the Common Sense Coalition won’t be in the Senate a year from now. That doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to vote. That’s their right until their replacement is sworn in, either after their retirement or their defeat. What it means, though, is that members of the Coalition don’t care about national security. They certainly aren’t interested in listening to the people. Thus far, they haven’t listened to the people.

This coalition isn’t made up of principled politicians. It’s made up of elitists who aren’t interested in listening to the people. Chuck Grassley is the senior senator from Iowa. He isn’t part of that Coalition. He’s just a politician who’s interested in doing the right thing, both for DACA recipients and for national security. He’s the chief author of a bill that’s been endorsed by President Trump. It’s the only bill that the Senate will debate that President Trump will sign or should sign. Listen to Sen. Grassley’s speech explaining why senators should vote for his legislation:

The text of Sen. Grassley’s bill, known as the Secure and Succeed Act, is significantly different than the CSC’s legislation. The biggest difference between the 2 bills is that the Grassley bill appropriates the money for the wall right away. In the section titled “Subtitle C—Border Security Enforcement Fund” the following appropriations are made:

The Secretary shall transfer, 8 from the Fund to the “U.S. Customs and Border 9 Protection—Procurement, Construction and Improvements” account, for the purpose described in 11 subsection (a)(1), $18,000,000,000, of which— 12 (A) $1,571,000,000 shall be transferred in 13 fiscal year 2018; 14 (B) $1,600,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2019; 16 (C) $1,842,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2020; (D) $2,019,000,000 shall be transferred in 19 fiscal year 2021; (E) $2,237,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2022; (F) $1,745,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2023; 177 (G) $1,746,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2024; (H) $1,776,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2025; (I) $1,746,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2026; and (J) $1,718,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2027.

Barring an act of Congress, the money for President Trump’s wall will be appropriated this year.

The Common Sense Coalition’s bill appropriates approximately $1,700,000,000,000 this year, then requires separate appropriations in the years following to build the wall. The Grassley bill appropriates the money immediately.

It’s worth noting that Democrats have the proverbial gun pointed at their heads. If Democrats don’t agree to President Trump’s conditions, DACA collapses and the recipients hold Democrats responsible. Remember this?

The chances for a repeat of that scene is high if Democrats don’t deliver.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sen. Schumer’s second shutdown is puzzling at best. Debate was supposed to start Tuesday on immigration reform. Sen. McConnell promised unlimited debate on the topic. Before the debate began, though, Sen. Schumer used the unanimous consent rule to prevent the debate from starting. Sen. Schumer, the senator that shut down the government to force a debate on DACA 2 weeks ago, has now shut down debate on DACA.

Sen. Schumer got his nose out of joint when Sen. Pat Toomey, (R-PA), introduced an amendment “that would withhold funding from so-called sanctuary cities that shield undocumented immigrants from federal law enforcement.” Sen. Schumer complained, saying the amendment “does absolutely nothing to address DACA, does absolutely nothing to address border security.”

Sen. McConnell agreed to a debate on immigration reform. He didn’t limit the debate to DACA. If Sen. Schumer doesn’t like that, tough. It’s time for Sen. Schumer to pull his big boy britches up. Acting like a whiny wimp because he didn’t get his way is what wimps do. If that’s the first reaction of a US senator, then it’s time to stop referring to Senate Democrats as being part of the world’s greatest deliberative body. It’s time to start thinking of them as crybabies.

Chuck Grassley’s speech puts things into proper perspective:

Why wouldn’t Sen. Schumer not welcome this debate? If he thinks that stripping funding from sanctuary cities is that unpopular, he should welcome that debate. Instead, Sen. Schumer apparently prefers protecting his vulnerable members from debating an issue that the overwhelming majority of Americans agree with.

Yet if the debate’s slow start is dispiriting for the hundreds of thousands of people whose lives could depend on its outcome, it’s not particularly surprising. “If you didn’t go into this debate realizing something like this was going to happen, you weren’t paying attention,” said Jim Manley, a veteran Senate aide who worked for Edward Kennedy and then for Harry Reid when the latter man served as majority leader. “I defy you to find worse debates in recent history than those over immigration. They are ugly, bloody debates chock-full of highly partisan social issues that seek only to divide and don’t bring anyone together.”

This isn’t about DACA recipients. It’s about Democrats playing political games. They don’t like it that President Trump and Sen. McConnell have called their bluff. Thanks to changing the dynamics of the debate, Republicans have put the Democrats in a difficult position to defend.

By opening up debate on all immigration-related matters, Sen. McConnell has put the Democrats into a position where they’ll have to debate all immigration-related issues. That’s the last thing that Sen. Schumer wants. Frankly, this should frighten vulnerable Democrats from red states.

Sen. McConnell couldn’t put Democrats in this pickle, though, without President Trump’s steadfast support:

But if the Democrats want to make a deal, it’s really up to them, because we want really tremendous border security, but we have to have Democrat support for DACA, and they are starting that process today. We didn’t want to have it in the big budget, because if we have it in the big budget, it’s going to get mixed up with all of the other things.

So now we have our military taken care of, and now we start very serious DACA talks today. And we are — I can tell you, speaking for the Republican Party, we would love to do DACA. We would love to get it done. We want border security and the other elements that you know about. Chain migration, you know about. The visa lottery, you know about. But we think there’s a good chance of getting DACA done if the Democrats are serious and they actually want to do it.

But they didn’t want tax cuts. They fought — we didn’t get one vote for massive tax cuts that have turned out to be unbelievably popular. And what came up — which was even a surprise to us — were, the big companies stepped up, and millions and millions of people have gotten tremendous bonuses. Nobody knew that was going to happen. That was a — that was just the beginning point.

The Democrats say that they want a DACA fix. If that’s true, it’s time they stepped up and provided votes to fix the problem permanently. If Democrats hide behind Sen. Schumer’s skirt, that’s their problem.

Democrats will be known for participating in Sen. Schumer’s second shutdown.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Reading this article is a reminder that DC often ignores what the people want. Early in the article, it says “But he later hedged, saying he wanted to wait to see what comes out of the Common Sense Coalition. This group of more than 20 senators, led by GOP Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), has begun drafting legislative text. But it still hasn’t reached a consensus about what it could support. ‘I think we’re getting pretty close on coming up with a proposal that may or may not be offered next week,’ Collins told reporters after the group’s last closed-door session. ‘There will probably be more than one [amendment offered] but it’s too early to tell right now.'”

Nothing in this article seems like they’re even slightly worried about what the American people want. If this “Common Sense Coalition” ignores the will of the American people as expressed in the 2016 election, the legislation should be defeated outright. Common Sense Coalition is just a slick attempt at marketing. It doesn’t have anything to do with doing the right thing by the American people.

These idiots in the Senate seem to think that the Trump coalition is irrelevant. Any member of the Common Sense Coalition that lives in a red state and that’s up for re-election in 2018 or 2020, regardless of party, should expect to be defeated.

Look at how dismissive Chris Wallace is of the American people:

Here’s the key part of the transcript:

WALLACE: Let’s turn to immigration. The Senate takes up DACA this week trying to find some solutions, some compromise, and what they are talking about — and also what the president is talking about, is a package that includes — now you put the tough part first, the president and some Republicans say that it all comes together, that you’re going to have a path to citizenship for the Dreamers in 10 to 12 years. You’re going to have tougher border enforcement on our southern border and also tougher enforcement both legal and illegal immigration.
Would you support that package?
JORDAN: I’ll support a package consistent with what the voters said. I mean, look, the voters don’t trust that Washington is going to do the right thing on immigration and they are tired of this, oh, we’ll give some kind of amnesty to folks who came here illegally and we promise, promise, promise will do something to secure the border — they’re sick of that play.
What they want is border security first. So, build a border security wall, end the chain migration, get rid of this crazy visa lottery, do things in a way that make good common — sanctuary city policy, get rid of those. Do those things first and then we’ll deal with the DACA situation. That is consistent with the mandate of the 2016 election and frankly consistent with what the president and what Republicans campaigned on.
WALLACE: But I’m asking you —
JORDAN: And that is consistent with Goodlatte’s legislation. That’s why we want to pass that.
WALLACE: I’m asking you a direct question because that isn’t where this compromise seems headed in the Senate. They are talking about doing them all at once, the path to citizenship and these other things all at the same time, not enforcement first.

What part of Jim Jordan’s statement didn’t Chris Wallace understand? The American people want the DACA fix only if the wall is built and chain migration ends immediately. This isn’t that complicated.

This is what happens when DC starts thinking that they can push the American people around. The fuse is lit. It won’t take long before DC pays the price for its stubbornness. DC-itis isn’t just something found in politicians. It’s also found in the media.

Don Davis’s article puts forth an interesting question with multiple ramifications. In the article, Davis wrote “On Tuesday night, Feb. 6, Democratic precinct caucus attenders in the 8th favored State Auditor Otto 1,072 to 729 in a governor race straw poll. It may have been the only congressional district U.S. Rep. Tim Walz did not win in his effort to become governor (the party reported Friday with most, but not all, votes counted that Walz led Otto by three votes in the 6th District, in the northern Twin Cities suburbs and northwest to St. Cloud). From all accounts, many of the DFL caucus sites were heavy with environmentalists who backed Otto. The same type of liberal may not be as happy with Nolan, who supports mining in the district.”

Had he not retired, Nolan would’ve faced a primary challenge from Leah Phifer. It’s clear from Ms. Phifer’s environment page that she’s a hardline environmentalist. It says “Minnesota has a complex, layered practice of permitting and protections designed to safeguard the public, the economy, and the environment. It is a process of which Minnesotans should be proud and one that Leah will fight to protect. Similarly, the federal government has due process – a system built upon three coequal branches that provide checks and balances to one another, protecting citizens from exploitation and unfair application of our laws. Leah has seen the crucial importance of due process throughout her career and opposes the use of legislative power to circumvent the role of the judicial or executive branches.”

It then continues, saying:

For these reasons, Leah opposes H.R. 3115, a bill that passed the U.S. House in early December 2017 to push through a land swap needed for the completion of the PolyMet mine in Hoyt Lakes. Enacting this legislation will void four pending lawsuits on the matter, preventing Minnesotans from questioning the legality of the land swap and eliminating the judicial branch’s role. Leah also opposes the MINER Act (HR 3905), which will prevent the completion of a two-year Forest Service study related to economic and environmental issues associated with mining near the Boundary Waters. It also designates Minnesota as the only state in the nation unworthy of public lands protections, requiring Congressional intervention into decisions regarding public lands in Minnesota. Leah believes politicians should not use their legislative power to place their thumbs on the scales of these important projects, as it prevents the regulatory process from working as intended and erodes our system of due process. She will fight to preserve Minnesotan’s trust in our procedural systems and work with all Minnesotans to build a strong, sustainable economy for many years to come.

Pipeline Removal

Minnesota has two petroleum refineries and an extensive system of pipelines transporting crude oil and refined petroleum across the state. Some of these pipelines contain deteriorating infrastructure, causing companies to seek their replacement. Leah supports exercising corporate responsibility through the removal of decommissioned pipelines where appropriate and requested by landowners. In addition to respecting individual property rights, such removal could have significant positive impacts on Northern Minnesota’s economy. A current proposal for the removal of Enbridge’s Line 3 has the potential to create 8,000 jobs and a inject over a billion dollars into the local economy. Furthermore, Leah will ensure discussion surrounding pipelines includes and respects Native American voices, a community that is disproportionately affected by the location of these pipeline routes.

Phifer doesn’t support rebuilding the Line3 Pipeline. She supports decommissioning and tearing out the Line3 Pipeline. Then, to throw a little pandering into her politicking, she said “Leah will ensure discussion surrounding pipelines includes and respects Native American voices, a community that is disproportionately affected by the location of these pipeline routes.”

I’ll expand on Ms. Phifer’s campaign later today.

This afternoon, Hogan Gidley, the deputy White House press secretary, was interviewed by Harris Faulkner. During the interview, Gidley expressed his displeasure with the McCain-Coons ‘compromise’ immigration bill. Gidley expressed his disgust by saying “I have to give it to Senators Coons and McCain. Congratulations because it takes a special kind of person to write a bill that’s worse than Graham-Durbin. They did it. It is incredible. You have to have a border wall in the security package. The president has been very clear about this. You have to end chain migration. You have to end the visa lottery. Absolutely, the president wants to fix DACA but let’s be clear. Not having a border wall is the same thing as Sen. McCain going to bed at night and locking his front door but leaving all of his windows open.

How stupid do these senators think President Trump is? They must think he’s the worst negotiator in the history of the republic. That bill won’t fly. It won’t get to President Trump’s desk.

Earlier in the program, Faulkner played a clip of a Democrat talking about how he was part of a group of 50 Republicans and Democrats who had come up with a bipartisan bill that didn’t include funding for a border wall. The Democrat, whose name I can’t remember, said that immigration legislation had to start with a bipartisan bill or it didn’t have a chance in the House or Senate. What BS. Just because a bill has bipartisan support doesn’t mean it fixes the problem.

Legislation that doesn’t fix border security issues is a non-starter with President Trump. No amount of bipartisanship happy talk will get it past President Trump’s veto.

It’s time the Senate woke up and realized that President Trump holds the cards in this fight. Senate liberals, including McCain, Graham and Flake, are like Sen. Schumer in that they’re playing a terrible hand badly. If they don’t do a 180, they’ll get thrown around like a rag doll.

According to CNN’s article, Sen. Schumer is looking for a reset in negotiations with the Trump administration on immigration, saying “We’re starting over. I took our thing off — they took their thing off the table, I took our thing, we’re starting over.” That’s the Democrats’ official statement but it’s meaningless.

In an interview with FNC’s Harris Faulkner, Sen. Mike Rounds was asked about negotiations. Ms. Faulkner said “I’m hearing that some of the talks are frosty, chilly. How would you describe them?” Sen. Rounds’ replied, saying “Well, I think once you get down to where the talks are actually going on, I think they’re going pretty well. Our discussions with rank-and-file — I think we’re making progress. I know that Sen. Schumer has to take a hardline — his far-left base is gonna demand that of him but I think the President responded to him very well, making it very clear that border security is part of any arrangement concerning a DACA agreement. And he’s absolutely correct and that’s the direction we’re going in and we’re really not hearing any disagreement among Democrats who are actually trying to find a solution.”

Another thing that’s changing the dynamic of this debate is that the Trump administration will be releasing a framework for what it’ll take to find a DACA fix. According to the article, Ms. Sanders “declined to provide details about what would be included in the framework, including whether it would provide a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who came to the US as children, known as Dreamers, signaling only that it will represent ‘a compromise that members of both parties can support.'”

There’s no question that Sen. Schumer is facing a ton of pressure from the special interests not to cave. That’s virtually a mission impossible. Red state Democrats will almost certainly have to vote for the things that President Trump wants. If they don’t, they’ll sign their political death certificate this November.

There’s no hiding on this high profile issue. With people this engaged, it’s pretty much impossible to hide. It’s decision time.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Anyone reading this article has to wonder if Democrats are intent on committing political suicide or whether Democrats learned anything while losing the shutdown battle. Apparently, Democrats haven’t figured anything out yet.

The heart of the article starts with “Chuck Schumer is taking his big spending boost for Donald Trump’s border wall off the table. The Senate minority leader, through an aide, informed the White House on Monday that he was retracting the offer he made last week to give Trump well north of the $1.6 billion in wall funding Trump had asked for this year, according to two Democrats. And now they say Trump will simply not get a better deal than that on his signature campaign promise.”

This isn’t that complicated if you aren’t driven by the special interests. The Democrats are right that the vast majority of Americans want a DACA fix. The thing that Democrats haven’t figured out or admitted is that Americans also want the wall built and chain migration ended. In fact, it isn’t so much that the American people want a DACA fix, a border wall and chain migration ended. It’s pretty much that they’re demanding those things.

If Democrats want to play hardball with President Trump, they’ll find themselves right back where they were this weekend — fighting with the American people. Good luck with that.

But providing border wall money could also push away more liberal Democrats, who prefer to completely restart negotiations rather than start from any existing bill, even a bipartisan one like the proposal written by Durbin and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

“Discussions were had coming up to Friday night are interesting for context,” said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii). But now, he said, “we start from a blank sheet of paper.”

The American people will have a major say in this fight/negotiation. Just because the left wing of the Democratic Party opposes something doesn’t mean that Americans agree with them.

Democrats are trying their best to frame the shutdown as a victory or, at worst, as a tie:

That’s nonsense. It has nothing to do with Democrats acting responsibly. This has everything to do with the American people putting their foot down and demanding immigration getting fixed.