House Passes Bill To Avoid Government Shutdown

[Merrytooth 5,748]

10 minutes ago, bcking said:

That all sounds great to me, other than actually building a wall.

 

I'm not against walls, I just think it will end up being  a colossal waste of money with very little impact. I think we need to sort out our "border" but is very concrete and unimaginative to think that a gigantic wall is the solution to that. 

 

USA should build a underground tunnel for the illegal immigrants all the way to Canada instead 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

54 minutes ago, Italian_in_NYC said:

Just give a green card to the DACA kids, build the wall (so there will be no more - or many less - DACA kids in the future), reform immigration system (no lottery, more limits on chain migration, heavy scrutiny for some countries) and everyone should be happy.

Of course, I have a feeling that come Feb 8, there will be another shutdown.

its that simple, fix immigration first. Then find a compromise not just for the dreamers but for many that have been a here a long time. we let them come, did we not 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

2 hours ago, yuna628 said:

 

Quite frankly, what you are pointing out someone can do is irresponsible. IMO it's kind of akin to an illegal alien adult bringing a baby into the country. They didn't enter the border over their own choosing but were allowed to be ''out of status'' per say. The terms of the agreement with the government is to get married within 90 days, remain and adjust or go home. Not remain and twiddle thumbs until you feel like it. Without having legal presence in this country, that spouse is subject to deportation and their entire future is in jeopardy. It remains the only way one can officially protect their K1-then spouse's status in the US, enables them to travel freely, and also enables them to obtain services they otherwise could not.

I'm sorry you're not ok with the way a K1 process can work.  But it's nothing akin to an illegal alien entering the country.  You're just wrong about that.

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

its that simple, fix immigration first. Then find a compromise not just for the dreamers but for many that have been a here a long time. we let them come, did we not 

To me it would make sense to do both at the same time. The compromise would probably help bring more people to the table.

[Dashinka 24,793]

2 hours ago, smilesammich said:

why not protect daca recipients and move forward with immigration reform at the same time? it's not like there are any new daca recipients becoming eligible with each passing day. 

funding the wall should not even be a question. ask trump said, mexico is paying for it. he should be concentrating on making that happen so he can get his ridiculous wall built.

 

Because human nature would be such that a flood of new illegal immigrants would come in with the hopes that eventually they would also be taken care of.  Isn't that what essentially happened in the '80's?

[Dashinka 24,793]

2 hours ago, Ban Hammer said:

 

[Crazy Cat 42,296]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Because human nature would be such that a flood of new illegal immigrants would come in with the hopes that eventually they would also be taken care of.  Isn't that what essentially happened in the '80's?

It seems to me that anything short of ending DACA, removal procedures, and ending anchor births just encourages the same repeated issues in the future.

[Dashinka 24,793]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

That all sounds great to me, other than actually building a wall.

 

I'm not against walls, I just think it will end up being  a colossal waste of money with very little impact. I think we need to sort out our "border" but is very concrete and unimaginative to think that a gigantic wall is the solution to that. 

 

I'm not really sure why it was so hard to agree on DACA recipients. Are they technically illegal immigrants? Yes of course, but they are pretty low on the totem poll in terms of "illegals" that we should be cracking down on. They were kids. They have no culpability. The "right thing" to do seems pretty obvious to me. If we are serious about immigration reform we can just see them as the "last of their kind", so to speak. The goal would be eventually a program like DACA won't be necessary. Unfortunately we aren't there yet.

Isn't that pretty much what the Secretary of Homeland Security said?

[Boiler 46,107]

Why do you need to wait to enforce the law?

[smilesammich 10,727]

8 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Because human nature would be such that a flood of new illegal immigrants would come in with the hopes that eventually they would also be taken care of.  Isn't that what essentially happened in the '80's?

and, let me guess, the yuge see-through wall must go up first to prevent human nature? 

this is the thing, so long as there are extremely limited avenues for legal immigration, people will continue to come here illegally. we've needed legal immigration reform for so long and it's never on the table. it's not on the table now. daca is an extremely limited group.

5 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Why do you need to wait to enforce the law?

who's waiting?

[Boiler 46,107]

7 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

 

this is the thing, so long as there are extremely limited avenues for legal immigration, people will continue to come here illegally. we've needed legal immigration reform for so long and it's never on the table. it's not on the table now. daca is an extremely limited group.

 

The US is very generous.

 

Much more than say, let me think, Canada.

[smilesammich 10,727]

it's also hilarious (and sad) that 'anchor babies' are being brought up on a immigration site where we all know the process.

The myth of the ‘anchor baby’ deportation defense

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

2 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

How am I supposed to determine what question you were answering when you use a one word answer?  I did read your post and the whole strengthening the border item you mentioned seemed like an afterthought after giving the DACA recipients a path to citizenship.  My argument along with many others is that if you don't strengthen the border first, you will just keep generating a new cycle that will have to be covered by a new or recycled solution.  To me that means people really don't care about border security.

The 'fix borders first' is a silly tactic used politically with promises of THEN after the border fix we will figure out what to do with DACA recipients. Yeah right !
Miller would be chomping at the bits to play dirty with that one.
I am sure congress is capable of multitasking and doing both at the same time.
If not then get more women in there who can. Others have to multitask in their jobs too. 
 

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

The US is very generous.

 

Much more than say, let me think, Canada.

and people illegally stay in canada too. 

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

2 hours ago, cyberfx1024 said:

I would love to do those but simultaneously in all honesty. But the Dems have the track record of saying something and voting for it, all the while at a later date not giving the same thing they agreed on the funding it needs to be implemented. So why risk them doing it to us again?

Funny I just posted a similar thing just about republicans before I even read your post and end of the thread.