Special: Trump restricts Cuba travel and extends protections for dreamers. Georgia race heats up.

ROBERT COSTA: Hello. I’m Robert Costa. And this is the Washington Week Extra .

One of the driving themes since President Trump took office five months ago is the steady rollback of some Obama-era policies. Friday brought one more of those announcements. The president was in Miami, changing travel and trade restrictions to Cuba.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) Effective immediately, I am canceling the last administration’s completely one-sided deal with Cuba. (Cheers, applause.) We will enforce the ban on tourism. We will enforce the embargo. (Applause.) We will take concrete steps to ensure that investments flow directly to the people, so they can open private businesses and begin to build their country’s great, great future, a country of great potential. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. COSTA: The updated policy doesn’t completely cut off Cuba. Alexis, you talked to an administration official who said you can’t put the genie back in the bottle 100 percent. So how much of the genie is out of the bottle?

ALEXIS SIMENDINGER: Well, in this particular case, the president was being lobbied very hard before this decision from the business community, from the hospitality and the tourist businesses, and of course from American travelers who were very eager to support – and we see this in polls – support the policy that President Obama had put in place after more than 50 years of really isolating Cuba. So the president was very aware that parts of his base, his business base, were saying that this might not be the right decision. But he felt very strongly that if he could kind of blend, make a hybrid decision out of this, that he might not alienate members of the business community and agriculture and all those who were really advocating to keep these ties going, which he’s doing – keeping the ties in place. But he definitely bowed to Senator Marco Rubio or Representative Mario Diaz-Balart, Republicans from Florida, who said this was a campaign promise, Mr. President, and really advocated hard at the White House to see the president make changes. And the biggest changes we’ll see are that Americans are not going to be able to do what’s called people-to-people travel, meaning that they book their own trips, which they felt is a violation of the tourism ban. And then also the president is going to – through the State Department, through rulemaking; this will be a long process – put into place a ban on Americans being able to spend their money at basically military- or intelligence-backed businesses in Cuba, which is supposedly 60 percent of Cuba’s economy, where the concern is that American dollars flow into hotels that are backed by the Castro regime, and that is all going to be worked out over probably a long number of months through regulation. So the president was a little fanciful in his political I’ve made good on a campaign promise.

MR. COSTA: Geoff, when you think about the president, two Cuban-Americans who represent Florida in Congress had a real role in leading the push for a more restrictive policy. It’s interesting to see some agreement with one of his old campaign rivals, Senator Marco Rubio, after that bruising presidential campaign. Tell us, what is being done by these lawmakers, Rubio and others, to try to influence President Trump?

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, Rubio held a lot of sway, mainly because of his vote, you’ll remember, on Rex Tillerson, the current secretary of state, and also because of his role in the current Russia investigations. Diaz-Balart, I’m told, traded – basically horse-traded his yes vote on the House health care bill in order for Trump to do his bidding, essentially, on the Cuba bill. But there’s a bipartisan group of about 55 senators, led by Jeff Flake and Patrick Leahy, who introduced legislation to lift sanctions on Cuba. What President Obama did in relaxing relations with Cuba is still fairly – hugely popular across the country, but what the president – the group the president was speaking to today was largely older Cuban-Americans in Southern Florida, a lot of Cuban exiles, who have wanted this administration to take a harder line on Cuba, and that was represented by what Diaz-Balart and what Rubio have been saying for months to this White House.

MR. COSTA: One of the areas where President Trump isn’t reversing the policy of his predecessor is the 2012 program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. These are the protections for the 800,000 so-called DREAMers, undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children. This is a major reversal from the campaign trail, when the president promised to deport them, but the change will not affect plans to remove the rest of the approximately 11 million people who are in the country illegally. How will the president’s diehard supporters, who have embraced his anti-immigrant rhetoric during the campaign, respond to this latest decision, Jeff?

JEFF ZELENY: I think at this point almost six months in – six months next week in – this isn’t that big of a surprise because he has signaled this along the way, that he’s going to leave this in place for now. And that’s what White House officials said today, that, you know, this is not going to necessarily be a permanent thing, he can still change this, but the reality here is this would have been very complicated and messy to do. You know, and the president, you know, has shifted a lot of his thinking. He views flexibility as being an asset, a strength, and I think this is one of these issues you would put that on. And this is probably also one of the issues that Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, some other sort of softer advisers, I guess, would say that this is the right thing to do. But in terms of his supporters, look, I think that he is – you know, he’s given them a hard line on immigration in terms of building the wall; we haven’t talked about that a lot. Who knows what the update of that is? So at some point he’ll have to reconcile that with them, but it’s probably difficult to imagine someone sort of coming on the right of the president on immigration – Steve King perhaps, but he’s a party of one, so.

MS. SIMENDINGER: Well, the president’s base was not happy about this. But, as Jeff says, the president has been very transparent about his struggle with this, and he has described it as a struggle. He said, you know, I really have heart and I love the children, and this is a really tough decision to try to make because this splinters families. And he’s described that if we could get to some other immigration rationale in the United States, either with Congress’ help, that maybe this could be rectified or resolved. But then he also kind of gave those who are anti-immigration a kind of a bone in a way by saying that the companion program that was halted in the courts that President Obama invented, called deferred action for the parents of these arrivals, was not going to go forward. And basically he just put a period at the end of a sentence that the court had already issued, which was that this was blocked and not going to be supported by –

ERIC WERNER: But in the presentation of these two decisions, the one that they trumpeted was the decision to halt so-called DAPA, that you were just talking about, even though in effect it already was halted by the courts, and the DACA decision on childhood arrivals was like a tiny asterisk at the bottom of the factsheet. You know, you had to read all the way down and then it’s like, oh my gosh, that’s happening. Well, that’s the news. So flip the story upside down. So it’s not like he wanted to, like, you know, make a big deal of the DACA decision because of the, you know, problems that it does create for the base. And Steve King may be a party of one, but he’s not without his influence. And he continues to say when you talk to him that if the president doesn’t make good on all of these promises – and he remembers every single one, including cancelling DACA – that the base will be unhappy.

MR. COSTA: It’s a smart ploy, because the president is not exactly like Congressman King or even the Attorney General Jeff Sessions in terms of being ideologically driven on immigration and seeing things from a pure policy lens. It seems the president often has these instincts, Jeff.

MR. ZELENY: I think that’s right. He does have the instincts. And in this case, the instinct probably goes to the majority of public opinion on this. I mean, I think he senses things – he may not know details about things in the weeds but he knows sentiment and public opinion. And I think he has wrestled with this. And, look, again, he says he’s going to be flexible, and this is something he’s going to be flexible on. We saw some other examples of that, on torture and other things, where his advisors said, look, don’t do this, sir, and so he has accepted that rationale. And so I think this is another example. Yes, there may be some complaining in the side, but they’ve – you know, he’ll give them something else. And, you know, I don’t think anyone will abandon him over this.

MR. COSTA: Earlier this week I spent a little time down in Georgia talking to voters ahead of the runoff election to replace Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price. It’s become a really tight race between Democrat Jon Ossoff and Republican Karen Handel. Both parties are hoping to notch a win to build some momentum ahead of next year’s midterm elections. If voter turnout is any key, I’d say the people of Georgia’s 6th Congressional District are feeling motivated too. Today was the last day of early voting and more than 120,000 people have already cast their ballots. That’s double from April’s special election. It’s about a quarter of registered voters in the district.

Erica, you were in Georgia earlier this year. What do you hear when you have talked to voters down there?

MS. WERNER: Well, I have not actually spent time in Georgia. However, based on what I hear from both parties on the Hill, they view this as a tossup. And as you are well-aware, this has become the most expensive House race in history, improbably in a district that has been held by Republicans since Newt Gingrich was elected there years ago. And they’re fighting to replace Secretary Price, now the HHS secretary, who held the district. So this is a district that should be, and is, really, a Republican district. If the Democrat does pull up what would be an upset, even though, you know, it has been close in polling, that is going to put some fear into Republicans about where they’re headed in the midterms.

MR. BENNETT: And Ossoff, he’s opened a lead in that district. And what’s also interesting is that even though that was Tom Price’s seat, President Trump has a 51 percent disapproval rating right now in that district. So he’s a drag on the Republican side. I talked to some Democrats who look at this as a bellwether race. And they’re also trying to field military veterans in what they view as, you know, contestable seats around the country. So, yeah, they definitely are – have their sights set on a victory.

MR. COSTA: What do you make of the Democrat, Ossoff?

MR. BENNETT: As a candidate, I think he has some flaws. But you know, he’s got a serious money advantage. I think the overarching politics are kind of like the wind in his sails. But again, as with most elections, it really comes down to turnout.

MR. COSTA: One thing I was struck by, just to close this out, Alexis and Jeff, was Republican voters down there seemed to still pretty much be with the president – Republicans. But they are concerned about the stalled agenda. They want health care repeal. They want tax cuts. And they don’t see it. And so when I asked them about Russia, they shrugged off the question a little bit, most of them, especially the educated, professional voter Republican. But they’re really unhappy about not having much getting done in Washington. Are Republicans actually going to pay a cost for that?

MR. ZELENY: We’ll find out. I think as Erica mentioned earlier in the broadcast, even though the president’s not on the ballot the next year, his Republicans are. A lot of them are. And if there’s nothing that they can go home to and say look this is what we’ve done, that’s a problem, because they control everything. They control the levers of government. So, yes, I think they will pay a price for that.

Now, rhetorically speaking, the president can blame it, you know, on the Democrats, on his detractors, the media, other things. But the reality here is, you know, if your name is on the ballot you have to say: I’ve done something. So he’s going to start getting a lot of heat from people in his own party. What about tax reform? What about – I mean, so there’s a lot of consternation here. But Russia has overshadowed everything, whether people are interested in it or not. And I agree with you, I don’t think they necessarily are at this point. It’s still stalling things.

MS. SIMENDINGER: The one thing that I noticed from a focus group that happened shortly after the election was how quick Republicans and Trump voters were to say when asked, who will you blame if the president is not able to deliver the agenda that he’s promised, they all said – at least the focus group that I – and I was surprised – they would blame Congress. And they were so specific they brought up names of members that they would blame. And they brought up Speaker Ryan, because they were aware that Speaker Ryan had not been a Trump defender during the campaign. So the idea that Congress is very unpopular, that resonates almost more among some Republicans than President Trump’s job approval.

MR. COSTA: Low-key Majority Leader McConnell escapes attention again. (Laughter.) It’s a recurring story in Washington, isn’t it Erica?

Anyway, that’s it for this edition of the Washington Week Extra . Follow me on Twitter at @CostaReports for updates from the Georgia runoff election next week. I’ll be there. And I’ll see you next week back around this table. Good night.