He’s just trying to buy off Sheriff Arapaio, who’s got the goods on his birth certificate from his crack team of investigators.
Absolutely. They did it to build support for immigration reform in Obama’s first two years. Once the President started hearing it from Latino groups who he needed to get reelected, and once it was clear he wasn’t going to be able to do immigration reform, he shifted policy to stop deportations of non-criminals. Something which it is not clear he’s allowed to do(a lower court ruled that he could not do that), and further, a violation of his oath of office.
As your link shows, if you come here illegally and otherwise keep your nose clean, your chances of being deported are about as likely as getting busted downloading music.
And that is iffinitis aguda, in reality it has to go higher than the state level to make it interesting to sources other than just the extreme right wing ones.
And you have a problem with that?
ICE is more efficient in using it’s resources, budget goes down, Repubs happy.
Undocumented laborers stay in the country providing an easily exploited, cheap source of labor, Repubs happy.
Adaher, please answer my question in post #199. I really want to know
Rubio’s terrible mistake was thinking the tea partiers could be convinced to accept any compromise at all. He thought being “one of them” would allow him to make the immigration bill palatable, instead the moment he didn’t toe the tea party line he ceased being one of them. Any effort spent convincing the tea party to support anything besides far right wing policies is wasted effort, the only immigration bill they will accept involves a game thrones style wall on the Mexican border and full prosecution/deportation of current illegals. If this bill is going to pass the house it will not be based around any amendments they pass or fail to pass, it will based entirely on whether Boehner is willing to break the Hastert rule once again possibly sinking his career.
From your own words you would seem to believe that enforcement of existing laws is racism. Bizarre.
Soul Searching indeed.
If racism is codified into law, that is not an improvement. Enforcing racist laws is not a good thing. Let us know if there’s any part of this you don’t understand, we are here to help.
If enforcement is racist, then Democrats should support open borders loudly and proudly.
I agree that immigration enforcement can be an awful thing, that’s why even 'self-deportation" was politically toxic to talk about. But what is self-deportation? It’s simply obeying the law! If the law is that awful that we can’t even imagine people obeying it, then it shouldn’t exist.
I support rule of law. I support democracy. Personally, I’d support open borders legislation. What I won’t support is an attempt to get open borders through deception of the public. Part of being a sovereign nation is getting to decide who and how many people may enter your country. The American public right now does not support open borders, or even a particularly liberal immigration policy. Heck, much of the Democratic coalition doesn’t support that. So let’s stop playing games and institute the enforcement policy the public demands.
Let’s start with you defining what a “liberal immigration policy” means. Then maybe we can have a look at the question of whether or not the American public supports such a thing. Right now, all we have is your assurance that whatever it is, the American public does not support it.
Can you respond to Post #199?
First off, elucidator didn’t say “enforcement” was racist, he said that “Enforcing racist laws is not a good thing.” There are plenty of enforcement measures that Democrats endorse–many of them are in the bill. There are others (supported by Republicans) that Democrats in general don’t support–some no doubt because they view these measures as unfair or racist. Failing to accept these is not at all equivalent to secretly advocating open borders; the argument so obviously reductionist that a 3rd grader would laugh at it.
Second, your whole argument seems to be that no matter what enforcement measure the Democrats agree to, they are not to be trusted unless and until the administration can prove that the measures will be 100% enforced. While the standard itself is ridiculous (try arguing to the traffic court that the officer who issued your speeding ticket is untrustworthy because his organization doesn’t catch every speeder), the key to this argument is the implicit assumption that this administration is not to be trusted. That political believe pretty much derails any fact-based argument being made…which is kinda the point of this thread: Republicans can’t really support meaningful immigration reform because it would offend the political sensibilities of a base that doesn’t want Obama to “score a win”.
I’d love to hear the answer to this as well, but as it would require actually pinning down what would be acceptable in a way that doesn’t depend on political party, I’m not holding my breath.
If we agree that enforcement of the laws that exist and the enhanced enforcement in the bill is also not racist, then we have no problem.
The problem comes in actually enforcing. The tools given to the government in the reform bill are very effective if used. An entry/exit system should mean a near 100% rate of deportations of people who overstay visas. The border control measures should sharply cut down on illegal entries. And with a small illegal population left over after reform, we can pretty much deport all who don’t qualify for legalization.
Now this is what the bill says. This is far harsher enforcement than we’ve ever had before. So it’s no wonder that conservatives are skeptical that it will actually be done. Does everyone here on this board endorse those harsher enforcement measures? Or is there an assumption that they won’t actually be used?
There are A LOT of illegal immigrants with criminal records. If the administration is determined to legalize the vast majority of them, then they will have to make a lot of exceptions. Then there’s the fact that many resorted to identify theft or forged documents to get jobs. That’s a felony too.
As I said, the law says immigrants have to have clean records, but most of them don’t, so it’s a way to deceive the public.
In any case, it looks like the REpublicans will get what they want on enforcement:
s of now, it would tighten border security requirements primarily by having Congress dictate exactly how secure the border must be before immigrants in the United States illegally can begin the process of gaining citizenship.
By shifting that responsibility to Congress and away from the executive branch, negotiators hope to pick up support from Republican senators who are reluctant to leave that determination to the administration.
5 things to know about immigration reform
The emerging deal also would include several other Republican priorities related to entry and exit biometrics, the E-Verify workplace verification program, and rules that would prevent immigrants from getting public benefits.
“Corker and I are trying to get enough of these together so you can get a meaningful bipartisan group on the bill,” explained Hoeven, who said he hoped to introduce the proposal as early as Wednesday.
Further, with support for the bill falling like a rock, Reid is now in a big rush:
Perhaps more ominously, the poll found strong support for prioritizing border security above a path to citizenship for currently-illegal immigrants. Independents favor security before a path by a two-to-one margin, and Republicans support it by a three-to-one margin. Democrats favored a path to citizenship over security, but by the barest of margins, 50 percent to 49 percent. Overall, CNN found that 62 percent of the public favors prioritizing security before a path to citizenship, while 36 percent favored a path over security.
nm
Recently CNN is not looking as doing a great job in polling lately, other polls are not so ominous.
68%! That’s totally popular, insanely popular, gigantically popular! Probably those polls are skewed, though, since the conservatives enjoy a 40% majority in this center-right nation…