The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
What do you see as the active downsides to the bill? Not the “doesn’t do enough” part, because it can always be expanded upon later. But in a world where comprehensive immigration reform requires 60 votes in the Senate and therefore bipartisan legislation, what is gained by not passing it?
The perception of Biden incompetence/inaction, nine more months of "Biden won't stop the invasion" takes, and probably a boost* to Trump's election chances.
*Might be small, might not be. But if the border is seen as a top pressing issue to more than just the MAGA base I think it helps Trump more than Biden.
I know this isn't really what you're asking, but the refusal is mostly political, right? Fear of losing a talking point that benefits the GOP.
_________________ "I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle
And every restriction is "at the discretion of the president". How is that a secure border?
No comprehensive immigration bill can pass the Senate without 60 votes. No circumstances exist where the Republican Party ends this election cycle with 60 votes. The options for both sides of the aisle are: compromise bill, or no immigration bill.
This is co-written by Republicans, advocated for by Republicans, includes more than half a billion dollars for restoration and expansion of the border wall, restricts and streamlines asylum, grants expansive presidential powers to shut down the border at a time when the Republican presidential candidate is passionately anti-immigration, and in no way prevents future attempts by the legislative bodies to pass additional immigration legislation.
It would be just as easy for the Republican Party to campaign on it as a legislative victory… “see, we forced Joe Biden to acknowledge the problem at the border,” …as it would be for the Democrats to campaign on “gosh gee see we’re trying.”
What do you see as the active downsides to the bill? Not the “doesn’t do enough” part, because it can always be expanded upon later. But in a world where comprehensive immigration reform requires 60 votes in the Senate and therefore bipartisan legislation, what is gained by not passing it?
I am all about realistic goals and policy evolving over time, but Biden's past actions demonstrate he will not enforce any of this. The first thing he did was undo much of what Trump had done to slow illegal immigration:
So if this really is at the executive's discretion, and god-willing Trump is not the president again, then it's not believable that any of the enforcement actions will actually occur. And to tie this back to your post in homeless thread, we have enough of an issue with people already here needing housing and food and basic healthcare that we should prioritize not increasing the scope of the problem by a population the size of West Virginia's every year.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
What do you see as the active downsides to the bill? Not the “doesn’t do enough” part, because it can always be expanded upon later. But in a world where comprehensive immigration reform requires 60 votes in the Senate and therefore bipartisan legislation, what is gained by not passing it?
The perception of Biden incompetence/inaction, nine more months of "Biden won't stop the invasion" takes, and probably a boost* to Trump's election chances.
*Might be small, might not be. But if the border is seen as a top pressing issue to more than just the MAGA base I think it helps Trump more than Biden.
I know this isn't really what you're asking, but the refusal is mostly political, right? Fear of losing a talking point that benefits the GOP.
they lost the the economy is horrible marketing plan so now they have to create one. what better way than for R's and D's to compromise and come up with a descent bill than MAGA R's saying it is DOA so orange man and his cult can use it as a talking point
_________________ Did the Mother Fucker pay extra to yell?
What do you see as the active downsides to the bill? Not the “doesn’t do enough” part, because it can always be expanded upon later. But in a world where comprehensive immigration reform requires 60 votes in the Senate and therefore bipartisan legislation, what is gained by not passing it?
The perception of Biden incompetence/inaction, nine more months of "Biden won't stop the invasion" takes, and probably a boost* to Trump's election chances.
*Might be small, might not be. But if the border is seen as a top pressing issue to more than just the MAGA base I think it helps Trump more than Biden.
I know this isn't really what you're asking, but the refusal is mostly political, right? Fear of losing a talking point that benefits the GOP.
Yeah, I understand the political calculus at the party level. Election year and all that.
What I don’t understand is how anybody (not legislators) who claims to genuinely care about immigration reform could not be rooting for it. It’s not as though the failure to pass this bill is going to make tougher legislation more likely…or as though passing it would prevent future actions.
As conservatives in Congress have blasted the new bipartisan border agreement for not going far enough, the legislation earned a key endorsement on Monday: the labor union that represents U.S. Border Patrol agents.
The National Border Patrol Council — which represents more than 18,000 agents — said the bill would “drop illegal border crossings nationwide and will allow our agents to get back to detecting and apprehending those who want to cross our border illegally and evade apprehension.”
It's a significant statement of support from a group that endorsed former President Donald Trump in 2020 and has repeatedly railed against President Joe Biden’s handling of the border.
“While not perfect, the Border Act of 2024 is a step in the right direction and is far better than the current status quo,” Brandon Judd, president of the council, said in the statement. “This is why the National Border Patrol Council endorses this bill and hopes for its quick passage.”
seriously. at this point if you support the republican party you are an idiot. until they get actual people in there to do their jobs instead of grandstanding and screaming look at me its always going to be a clown show
_________________ Did the Mother Fucker pay extra to yell?
Agree. Anyone who endorses codifying crises levels of illegal immigration as the new baseline is a fucking idiot. Anyone who thinks USCIS can process a 3,200,000 case backlog of asylum petitions in six months with anything other than a rubber stamp is a fucking idiot. Anyone who thinks funding 25 miles of wall along a 1,500 mile border is 'security' is a fucking idiot. And finally anyone who thinks the way to deal with the devastating impacts of continuous massive illegal immigration is to create ever larger, more complex, and more expensive bureaucratic job-for-life federal institutions instead of just stopping them from entering in the first place is fucking idiot.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
Well if it’s that simple, why didn’t they impeach him?
Because the Republicans are basically a cargo cult of a political party at this point, incapable of anything but shallow imitation and idol worship.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
Agree. Anyone who endorses codifying crises levels of illegal immigration as the new baseline is a fucking idiot. Anyone who thinks USCIS can process a 3,200,000 case backlog of asylum petitions in six months with anything other than a rubber stamp is a fucking idiot. Anyone who thinks funding 25 miles of wall along a 1,500 mile border is 'security' is a fucking idiot. And finally anyone who thinks the way to deal with the devastating impacts of continuous massive illegal immigration is to create ever larger, more complex, and more expensive bureaucratic job-for-life federal institutions instead of just stopping them from entering in the first place is fucking idiot.
Quote:
Approximately 60% of all border apprehensions are single adults, a good number of whom are men of military age. The Border Act of 2024 will codify into law authorities that U.S. Border Patrol agents never had in the past. This will allow us to remove single adults expeditiously and without a lengthy judicial review, which historically has required the release of these individuals into the interior of the U.S.
This alone will drop illegal border crossings nationwide and will allow a great many of our agents to get back to detecting and apprehending those who want to cross our borders illegally and evade apprehension. While not perfect, the Border Act of 2024 is a step in the right direction and is far better than the status quo, which is why the National Border Patrol Council endorses the bill and hopes for a quick passage.
Again, any comprehensive immigration bill is going to have to get 60 votes in the Senate. And that means that any first step immigration reform effort has to be something Democrats and Republicans can both support.
So I ask again: if a bill like this, negotiated at length by both sides and supported by the border patrol union, is torpedoed unilaterally…what do you think will ever happen? What do you think the “and then” is after an act like this?
If incrementally restrictive acts that invest vast resources in physical barriers and supports for the people managing and patrolling the border are rejected outright…what impetus does anybody have to believe that an immigration bill would survive a vote? Sufficient to convince them to go through the prolonged negotiation process again?
This act doesn’t just erase a bill that people on the front lines to say will help… It makes future passable immigration bills less likely.
Approximately 60% of all border apprehensions are single adults, a good number of whom are men of military age. The Border Act of 2024 will codify into law authorities that U.S. Border Patrol agents never had in the past. This will allow us to remove single adults expeditiously and without a lengthy judicial review, which historically has required the release of these individuals into the interior of the U.S.
This alone will drop illegal border crossings nationwide and will allow a great many of our agents to get back to detecting and apprehending those who want to cross our borders illegally and evade apprehension. While not perfect, the Border Act of 2024 is a step in the right direction and is far better than the status quo, which is why the National Border Patrol Council endorses the bill and hopes for a quick passage.
Which "authorities that U.S. Border Patrol agents never had in the past" exactly that will "allow us to remove single adults expeditiously and without a lengthy judicial review"? Give them ankle bracelets and tracker phones? And even then, will they actually go get people and remove them? That appears to be at the Secretary and President's discretion. So, not happening.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
Approximately 60% of all border apprehensions are single adults, a good number of whom are men of military age. The Border Act of 2024 will codify into law authorities that U.S. Border Patrol agents never had in the past. This will allow us to remove single adults expeditiously and without a lengthy judicial review, which historically has required the release of these individuals into the interior of the U.S.
This alone will drop illegal border crossings nationwide and will allow a great many of our agents to get back to detecting and apprehending those who want to cross our borders illegally and evade apprehension. While not perfect, the Border Act of 2024 is a step in the right direction and is far better than the status quo, which is why the National Border Patrol Council endorses the bill and hopes for a quick passage.
Which "authorities that U.S. Border Patrol agents never had in the past" exactly that will "allow us to remove single adults expeditiously and without a lengthy judicial review"? Give them ankle bracelets and tracker phones? And even then, will they actually go get people and remove them? That appears to be at the Secretary and President's discretion. So, not happening.
so you are one of the ones Biden is doing absolutely nothing about the border and neither are democrats but when there is a bipartisan bill you point back to Biden doing absolutely nothing, not republicans (and the big bad orange man)?
_________________ Did the Mother Fucker pay extra to yell?
It's not an either or with Biden and the red team, they both suck on this issue. The 2004 and 2014 bills were both MUCH better.
I think of it like a rapidly filling bath tub. Right now we have a bucket and we occasionally scoop out water when absolutely necessary, but the tub is still filling. What this bill does is provide a much more expensive bucket and the option to more frequently scoop should things get worse than they are in the crises we are in today. What it should do is reach up and turn down the faucet.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
It's not an either or with Biden and the red team, they both suck on this issue. The 2004 and 2014 bills were both MUCH better.
I think of it like a rapidly filling bath tub. Right now we have a bucket and we occasionally scoop out water when absolutely necessary, but the tub is still filling. What this bill does is provide a much more expensive bucket and the option to more frequently scoop should things get worse than they are in the crises we are in today. What it should do is reach up and turn down the faucet.
That’s a very reductive analogy, but I still want to know what any person genuinely concerned about illegal immigration believes is accomplished by the rejection of this bill.
Big change legislation doesn’t happen on its own. Incremental policy changes pave the way for something to happen, by nudging the goalposts and by laying a groundwork. The ACA, maybe the biggest sea change legislation of the last 20 years, didn’t happen in a bubble. It took years of passing bills like the Medicare Modernization Act (2003) and the National Institutes of Health Act of 2006 to create a framework, and to nudge sweeping change into a context that felt politically feasible.
If those bills had been defeated by purists because they only changed the size of the bucket or nudged the speed of the scooping, that wouldn’t have increased the likelihood of major legislation happening. It would’ve sent a message that the political will was lacking, and most likely ended ACA efforts before they began.
Long story short, if you genuinely care about immigration reform and border security, then the tanking of this bill is destructive to your cause even if you don’t think the bill accomplishes much. It communicates a lack of return on investment to politicians on both sides of the aisle, and that is ruinous because they are primarily driven by transactional responses to governing. It reduces the likelihood that future bills will aim higher than.
If you are opposed to expansive immigration reform, then Republicans may have just handed you a greater victory than anything you could have strategized for yourself.
It's not an either or with Biden and the red team, they both suck on this issue. The 2004 and 2014 bills were both MUCH better.
I think of it like a rapidly filling bath tub. Right now we have a bucket and we occasionally scoop out water when absolutely necessary, but the tub is still filling. What this bill does is provide a much more expensive bucket and the option to more frequently scoop should things get worse than they are in the crises we are in today. What it should do is reach up and turn down the faucet.
It's not an either or with Biden and the red team, they both suck on this issue. The 2004 and 2014 bills were both MUCH better.
I think of it like a rapidly filling bath tub. Right now we have a bucket and we occasionally scoop out water when absolutely necessary, but the tub is still filling. What this bill does is provide a much more expensive bucket and the option to more frequently scoop should things get worse than they are in the crises we are in today. What it should do is reach up and turn down the faucet.
That’s a very reductive analogy, but I still want to know what any person genuinely concerned about illegal immigration believes is accomplished by the rejection of this bill.
Big change legislation doesn’t happen on its own. Incremental policy changes pave the way for something to happen, by nudging the goalposts and by laying a groundwork. The ACA, maybe the biggest sea change legislation of the last 20 years, didn’t happen in a bubble. It took years of passing bills like the Medicare Modernization Act (2003) and the National Institutes of Health Act of 2006 to create a framework, and to nudge sweeping change into a context that felt politically feasible.
If those bills had been defeated by purists because they only changed the size of the bucket or nudged the speed of the scooping, that wouldn’t have increased the likelihood of major legislation happening. It would’ve sent a message that the political will was lacking, and most likely ended ACA efforts before they began.
The bill normalizes crises levels of illegal immigration. So the damage we are seeing in NYC, Chicago, Denver, etc. stops being correctly called out as a crises and becomes the baseline and expected state. This should be a non-starter for any and all discussions on the topic.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 79 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
