It’s Tuesday, the traditional day for elections and for our pause-and-consider newsletter on politics and policy.

[link removed]

[link removed]

Photo by Joel Angel Juarez/The Republic / USA Today Network

It’s Tuesday, the traditional day for elections and for our pause-and-consider newsletter on politics and policy. We think of it as a mini-magazine in your inbox.

A DO-OR-DIE MOMENT
By Lisa Desjardins, @LisaDNews ([link removed])
Correspondent

For months — nay, over a year ([link removed]) — Republicans in Congress have stressed there’s a crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border and that urgent action is needed ([link removed]) .

They pushed to connect the issue ([link removed]) to any funding for allies in Ukraine, Israel and the Pacific Rim.

Now, after a hard-negotiated bipartisan Senate compromise bill ([link removed]) has been released, Republicans are either vowing to block it or declaring it “dead on arrival ([link removed]) ,” in the words of House Speaker Mike Johnson.

The long-awaited $118 billion Senate proposal on border security and wartime aid released Sunday faces a difficult path forward.

Along with funding for Ukraine and Israel, as well as humanitarian assistance for people fleeing Gaza, this bill is a dramatic rewriting of the asylum system ([link removed]) . It’s been described to me by one advocate as a “seismic shift.”
[link removed]
Watch the segment in the player above.

There are some substantive objections from conservatives. They question if the bill truly ends the “catch and release” program allowing undocumented immigrants into the country to wait for processing, among other things.

The bill faces a potential do-or-die moment in the Senate, where it will need 60 votes to get through a key procedural test. That vote, to essentially open debate, is expected Wednesday.

Senators backing the deal say that can change — if only they can get enough support in the Senate to put pressure on the House.

While its prospects increasingly look dim, we think it important to take a look at what the bill contains. It is the most significant immigration proposal to see daylight in a decade.

Here’s a quick look at what the 370-page bill ([link removed]) funds, along with major proposed immigration changes.

A FUNDING BREAKDOWN

Total size: $118.3 billion. That includes:
* About $60 billion in military aid for Ukraine
* $14.1 billion in aid for Israel
* $4.83 billion in aid for the Indo-Pacific region
* $10 billion in humanitarian assistance for Ukraine, Israel, Gaza, among other places
* $2.3 billion in refugee assistance inside the U.S.
* $20.2 billion for improvements to U.S. border security
* $2.72 billion for domestic uranium enrichment

THE IMMIGRATION PROVISIONS

Asylum. There are many big changes here.
* A new system.The bill moves most new asylum cases to the Department of Homeland Security. No longer would these cases be heard by immigration judges under the Department of Justice. Instead, the people hearing these cases would be asylum officers with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, an agency under DHS.
* This rule is both for the initial asylum claims and also for most appeals. The idea here is that it is a much faster review, often without attorneys or a deliberative process.
* A new standard. At the initial interview, an asylum seeker must establish “clear and convincing” proof that they have a credible fear of persecution if they stay in their country. The standard would change to a “significant possibility.” The bill authors believe this change would result in the vast majority of applications being rejected.
* Other new criteria, earlier in the process. During the initial interview, the bill says, asylum claims can be rejected if the person has a disqualifying criminal history, if they were living safely in a third country before seeking asylum, or if they could safely relocate in their original home country.
* A new process. Under the bill, this system is to be in place and operational 91 days after the bill is signed into law. This is how it would work:
+ Migrants receive an initial screening within 90 days of arrival.
+ If the claim fails — a “negative protection decision” — they are immediately ordered for removal. They have 72 hours to appeal or request a hearing.
+ If the claim passes initial screening — “positive protection decision” — they will get a work authorization immediately, be released into the country and have another 90 days before a final decision is made on their case.

[link removed]

Photo by Qian Weizhong/VCG

New detention beds and rules. The number of detention beds goes to 50,000. Right now, there are fewer than 40,000.
* People who arrive and are processed via ports of entry are not automatically detained. They could await processing inside the United States. Migrants entering the country illegally and seeking asylum are more likely to be detained than under current law.
* But there are significant exceptions, including families, who are not detained. Instead they will be tracked using one of various “alternatives to detention” methods, chosen by the person processing the claim. Options include ankle bracelets and simple contact.

New border emergency authority. The bill sets up a new trigger based on the average number of migrant encounters. After this level is reached, most new migrants entering the country illegally, outside of legal ports of entry, will automatically be removed. But it is more complicated than “shutting down” the border.

If the average number of migrants crossing is:
* 4,000 per day, over seven days, DHS can launch this authority.
* 5,000 per day, over seven days, DHS must launch this authority.

This emergency trigger turns off within two weeks of the numbers falling below 4,000 or 5,000. And it cannot be used more than 270 days in the first year, with smaller amounts in the next two years. This authority would sunset in three years.

When the emergency authority is launched, DHS can ban entry by all those who enter illegally, i.e. not through ports of entry. For most of the people turned away, there would be no screening for credible fear asylum seekers before being returned.

But there are exceptions:
* Unaccompanied minors would be admitted.
* DHS can screen for people claiming they will be tortured upon return, or who are fighting other removal orders already in place.
* At least 1,400 of the migrants who enter outside legal ports of entry will be processed per day at the southwest border. (Allowing some narrow access to asylum, and fulfilling demands of international law.)

Humanitarian parole. This bill ends other forms of parole, including the one used now to release migrants found crossing the border illegally. It does not significantly change the president’s ability to use humanitarian parole. Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans ([link removed]) (CHNV) — the parole program known as Processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezeulans stays in place, with residents of those countries able to apply for entry using those spots. However, they must come through ports of entry, generally.

OTHER BIG PROVISIONS
* More legal immigration: 50,000 new visas a year for five years. These are job- or family-related.
* The Afghan Adjustment Act: This gives green cards and pathways to citizenship for Afghans admitted or paroled after the U.S. withdrawal in 2021.
* The bill blocks funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) ([link removed]) for this and prior appropriations.

As always, anything can change in the next 24 hours. Watch this space! ([link removed])
More on politics from our coverage:
* Watch: How the Senate’s $118 billion border and foreign aid package would transform the U.S. immigration system ([link removed]) .
* One Big Question: But will this bill pass the House? Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, one of the three key senators who negotiated the bipartisan Senate deal, said the “old-fashioned compromise” is a way to call Speaker Mike Johnson’s bluff. ([link removed])
* A Closer Look: With calls for a cease-fire, protesters pressure city councils ([link removed]) for U.S. action in Gaza.
* Perspectives: NPR’s Tamara Keith and Amy Walter of the Cook Political Report with Amy Walter discuss how immigration will affect the 2024 presidential election ([link removed]) .

CROSSROADS: TRUMP’S IMPACT ON A DIVIDED AMERICA
[link removed]
Watch the segment in the player above.
By Sarah Clune Hartman, @sarahclune ([link removed])
Producer

Frank Carlson, @frankncarlson ([link removed])
Senior Coordinating Producer

After a pair of wins in Iowa and New Hampshire, former President Donald Trump is on his way to his third GOP nomination for the highest office in the country.

He has maintained a commanding lead in the polls. Elected Republican leaders are scrambling to climb on board. But there are some holdouts in Republican and conservative circles, including “Atlantic” magazine writer David Frum, a longtime Trump critic who spoke with Judy Woodruff ([link removed]) last week.

“Trump is exactly the person and exactly the thing that conservative thought has always sought to exclude from power,” said Frum, the former speechwriter for President George W. Bush. “The anger and rage, the desire to target, the willingness to use methods that are anti-constitutional, the fascination with violence — these are characteristics of a different kind of politics than the kinds of politics in the past we have called ‘conservative.’”

And if Trump’s reelected, what effect will he have on today’s political divisions?

We will be more fractious, more argumentative, Frum said, “because all the demons that exist in any society will not only be liberated by the political system, but will be encouraged, because Donald Trump will be looking to his constituency of very upset people in order to impose his lawless will upon the constitutional system.”

Explore the full “America at a Crossroads” series ([link removed]) , a close look at the divisions fracturing the U.S.
More on the 2024 race from our coverage:
* Trump’s 2024 Trials. Trump can face trial in a 2020 election interference case, an appeals court ruled Tuesday. This is a rejection ([link removed]) of the former president’s claims that he is immune from prosecution.
* Live Updates. The Nevada presidential primaries start Tuesday. The Democratic primary election is on Feb. 6, while the Republican caucuses will be held on Feb. 8. Get the live results here ([link removed]) .
* Mark Your Calendars. On Feb. 8, the Supreme Court will hear arguments for a pivotal case on whether Trump is eligible to run for president. Listen live here ([link removed]) .

TRUMP SHOULD NOT GET IMMUNITY, 2 OUT OF 3 AMERICANS SAY
[link removed]
Photo by Mike Segar/Reuters
By Laura Santhanam, @LauraSanthanam ([link removed])
Health Reporter & Coordinating Producer for Polling

About two-thirds of U.S. adults do not think Trump should have immunity from criminal prosecution for actions he took while president, according to a PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist poll to be released Wednesday.

Overall, 64 percent of U.S. adults say Trump should not receive immunity from prosecution. The poll, conducted Jan. 29 to Feb. 1, showed that 91 percent of Democrats and 65 percent of independents agreed. Trump wasindicted by a grand jury ([link removed]) in August over efforts that threatened the peaceful transfer of power, leading up to the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that Trump can stand trial on these charges, rejecting his claims of broad executive immunity.

The latest poll offers another snapshot of where the public stands on Trump’s legal problems and whether it might affect voter support.

A majority of Republicans — 68 percent — said Trump should be granted immunity for his actions while in office. White evangelical Christians and people who voted for Trump in the 2020 election were among the ex-president’s most ardent supporters on this question. In addition to Trump’s legal team arguing in the courtroom that he deserves immunity, Trump has often made the same claim on the campaign trail.
[link removed]
Image by Jenna Cohen/PBS NewsHour
The D.C. Court of Appeals said Tuesday that, being a citizen of the United States, the Republican presidential candidate (and his party’s likely nominee) had “all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant,” but was not above the law.

"It would be a striking paradox if the President, who alone is vested with the constitutional duty to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,' were the sole officer capable of defying those laws with impunity,” the judges wrote.

Trump is expected to appeal the decision.


HOW TO GET YOUR VOICE HEARD ON CAPITOL HILL

[link removed]
Watch the video in the player above.

By Cecilia Lallmann, @CeceLallmann ([link removed])
Video Production Assistant

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill and state houses around the country are elected to represent the needs of their constituents. But it's hard to stand out when a single lawmaker's office can receive thousands of requests every day.

So what's the best way to reach out to your representative?

The PBS NewsHour spoke with Bradford Fitch, CEO of Congressional Management Foundation, a D.C. nonprofit that works directly with congressional offices to improve their operations and interactions with constituents. He shared five tips ([link removed]) to remember when reaching out to your elected representatives.

The No. 1 tip? Personalize the message you are sending. Your congressperson is much more likely to read and respond to your message if you localize the issue and tell a personal story.

“Stories capture the attention of lawmakers, usually in a more powerful way than data,” Fitch said. “Telling that story to your lawmaker can be one of the most effective ways for you to get the lawmaker’s attention.”

#POLITICSTRIVIA
By Ali Schmitz, @SchmitzMedia ([link removed])
Politics Producer

Back in January, President Joe Biden made his first visit to the U.S.-Mexico border since taking office. He made the trip as he faced heightened criticism ([link removed]) from lawmakers and immigrant rights advocates over his administration’s tougher stance on the humanitarian crisis on the southern border.

In total, 15 U.S. presidents have made presidential visits to Mexico.

Our question: Who was the first U.S. president to visit a border city while in office?

Send your answers to [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) or tweet using #PoliticsTrivia. The first correct answers will earn a shout-out next week.

Last week, we asked: Who is the only other Cabinet member to be impeached, and when did the Senate trial take place?

The answer: Secretary of War William Belknap. When it became clear the House was going to impeach him in 1876, Belknap resigned his office. But he was impeached the same day on five counts ([link removed]) , with the House charging him with "criminally disregarding his duty as Secretary of War and basely prostituting his high office to his lust for private gain." He was acquitted on all five counts. (Thanks to readers who reached out to say there was a link that helped with last week’s trivia question. Sometimes, your newsletter editor likes to leave breadcrumbs ☺.)

Congratulations to our winners: Beverley Chang and Carolyn Ragan!

Thank you all for reading and watching. We’ll drop into your inbox next week.
[link removed]
Want more news and analysis in your inbox?
Explore all of the PBS NewsHour's newsletters ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
[link removed]

============================================================
Copyright © 2023 WETA, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:
3620 South 27th Street
Arlington, VA 22206

** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
** update subscription preferences ([link removed])