RT is reporting that the White house is offering Congress that it will continue the DACA program in return for funding for The Wall. To the tune of some B$US30 or thereabouts.

https://www.rt.com/usa/415127-trump-wall-proposal-daca/

RT is one of those sites which all us red-blooded sheeples ain't supposed to read, so expect interference.

I am not saying I like this particular deal, but I do like the idea that if you want something, like continued residence for 800,000 members of your particular ethnic community, you need to be prepared to give up something else.

For far too long every faction, including those on the left, wants what it wants for free--because Our Issue is a moral imperative, you know. The prime example here is the right to life/pro family movement, which flatly refused to even hear of any sort of compromise, not on the core principles, but on ancillary issues, like liberalized adoption procedures and better support for single parents, for example, or revision of insurance and hospital visit regulations to accommodate gay partnerships, for another, with the result that the pro-lifers lost across the board. All because they would not "make deals with The Devil", so now they get to congratulate themselves on their virtuous intransigence while the rest of us get on with our lives.

About DACA, let me be clear here. I have no problem with persons brought here as children being able to stay with some kind of legalized status. I have a major problem with them then being able to sponsor the in-migration of a hundred or so per each of the relatives with whom they have supposedly had no contact. I also do not believe that every one of the 800,000 or so, assuming for the sake of argument that that figure is even accurate, is a future Rhodes Scholar who will improve our nation. Nor do I believe that the beneficiaries of DACA are all from Latin America. I have thought for years that our immigration policy needs to privilege migrants from our own hemisphere, migrants who can show valid ID documents issued by their home governments and demonstrate competence in Spanish, Portuguese or a recognized indigenous language.

About The Wall, first, we already have one, and second, migration from the south is already slowing down, probably because of increasing aridity and consequent danger of the land passage. Trump's Wall, I think, is a typical Republican publicity stunt/boondoggle handout to Republican big dollar donors. If any administration were ever serious about limiting in-migration, I think the first thing it would do is increase the Coast Guard, maybe by folding some of our navy resources into the CG--and stationing a carrier in the Caribbean--, and the second thing would be to mount a massive investigation and prosecution of ID theft, which could be done under the authority of existing laws. Sorry folks, ID theft is NOT a victimless crime, and, pace the occasional report on Neocon Propaganda Radio, it can affect anyone, not just strung out dopers.

So, while I don't think this particular deal is a good idea, I do like the principle that if you want something you also have to support something I want. Like shut down the MJ plantations on public lands. Or outlaw glyphosate. Or revive the anti-trust suit against Monsanto.