Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 4
'and the democrats are crying uncle. Now that sanctimonious blue 'sanctuary' states and cities are seeing 1/1000th of what place like El Paso see, they're crying uncle and saying
No mas.
Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker is the latest:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/ill...CHICAGO ' Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker on Monday fired off a letter to President Joe Biden about an 'untenable' migrant crisis in the state, calling for an overhaul to the system and blasting the White House for a 'lack of intervention and coordination at the border.'
Pritzker, a Democrat, said the state's resources were beyond strained after Texas officials bused more than 15,000 migrants to Illinois in the past year.
'Unfortunately, the welcome and aid Illinois has been providing to these asylum seekers has not been matched with support by the federal government,' Pritzker wrote. 'Most critically, the federal government's lack of intervention and coordination at the border has created an untenable situation for Illinois.' 15,000 is nothing compared to what border states are getting.
The media and the administration have been boxed into a corner with their constant stream of gaslighting about our wide-open southern border being 'secure'. Now pompous blue state governors like Pritzker and Hochul are having to beg for help as their states are buckling under the weight of just a few migrants.
The GOP needs to ,are this and public safety the only 2 issues on the ballot and they'll win everywhere.
No. of Recommendations: 1
The GOP needs to...
Except they don't have a tenable policy either. Yeah, they may win on promises. But they won't be able to fulfill most of those promises without real immigration reform, which they have been opposed to for at least the past 30 years. I think Reagan was the last POTUS that signed a significant immigration bill passed by Congress (which would be 40 years ago!).
I was musing with our daughter just last night that all the undocumented migrants should go home for six months. Just leave. And then us USA'ians would realize just how much we rely on those folks. The price of produce would skyrocket, just as one example. Of course, you could never organize such a thing. And I'm not sure that would move Republicans to support comprehensive reforms anyway. I'm starting to think it was like abortion: a good issue to rally the troops, but they didn't really want to solve it. Now that they have, it's been beating many "R" candidates at the polls. Same here...they don't want to make immigration better because then they wouldn't have a bludgeon to use. Unlike abortion, I don't think making immigration policy better would blow up in their faces. So they just want the bludgeon.
No. of Recommendations: 2
And then us USA'ians would realize just how much we rely on those folks. The price of produce would skyrocket, just as one example.
I take it you do not do the grocery shopping in your family.
Produce, meat and groceries are sky-rocking regardless of the illegal influx.
Let see now, who will come along and blame Trump for Bidenflation....
No. of Recommendations: 2
Actually, I do. Or, we do. We usually go together.
If all the undocumented workers went away, they sky-rocketing would be far higher. You probably couldn't even get some items. They would just rot in the fields.
No, I don't blame Trump. I blame 40 years of lack of meaningful immigration reform. Both parties, because both parties have been in control at different points in those decades, and neither did much about it.
I also don't blame Trump for inflation. A lot of that was COVID. War in Ukraine and other events aren't helping.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Not only is the left finally complaining about the illegal alien invasion they also are complaining about the increase crime rate in their cities.
Snip
'For years, conservatives have complained about leftist district attorneys, zero-bail laws, lenient sentencing, meaningless sentencing, police defunding, failure to back the blue, open borders, and other fixtures of the plague of violence now seen in America's blue cities.
The results are ugly, with mass numbers of Americans victims. What has to come as a surprise to leftists is that they're not exempt from it, either. They're getting mugged, too, same as other people in blue cities.
And worse.
'U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, was the victim of an armed carjacking Monday night in Washington, D.C., Fox News Digital confirmed.'
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/10/lefti...
No. of Recommendations: 5
If all the undocumented workers went away, they sky-rocketing would be far higher. You probably couldn't even get some items. They would just rot in the fields.
We have had migrant workers since forever it seems. The crops are harvest, some migrant workers go back home with their paychecks while others stay finding other work. They have nothing to do with Bidenflation.
The overwhelming illegals recently here are not field workers, they can go home and the crops etc will be harvest same as always.
No. of Recommendations: 3
We have had migrant workers since forever it seems. The crops are harvest, some migrant workers go back home with their paychecks while others stay finding other work. They have nothing to do with Bidenflation.
The overwhelming illegals recently here are not field workers, they can go home and the crops etc will be harvest same as always.
This. Under Trump we didn't have 7 or 8 million people flood the border and we had a far better economy than we have now.
It's not even debatable; they've lost.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Nothing is over until these racist, Anti Immigrant Liberals admit that they are just that.
And, some of us - who have made a humble but steady profit combining illegal immigration with taxpayer dollars aren't gonna go away.
No. of Recommendations: 2
And this is why you're my hero, my friend.
The beatings must continue'until morale improves.
No. of Recommendations: 3
I think Reagan was the last POTUS that signed a significant immigration bill passed by Congress (which would be 40 years ago!). - 1pg
--------------------
Yep he sure. The democrats sure put one over on him. Amnesty now, followed by border security later. That was the deal and the security part never materialized. So that is why the conservatives demand securing the border before making other immigration reforms that both side would agree on. Fool me once, as the saying goes.
No. of Recommendations: 11
Unless you have supporting data, I have to call BS. I found this in less than 10 seconds:
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/04/13...Over 10M illegal immigrants in 2017, which was under Trump. I selected pre-COVID for obvious reasons (i.e. everything shut down during COVID; it was a highly disruptive event). It peaked around 2006 (Bush II).
An additional few seconds netted me this:
https://cis.org/Report/Estimating-Illegal-Immigran...COVID dip, and then a return to approximately the mean. Notably, numbers did not dip significantly under Trump, except during COVID.
Also...economy. Have to call BS again. Things have returned more or less to normal. U6 unemployment is actually lower in August than it was August of 2019 (again, before COVID).
https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_u_6_unemployment....
Sure, there are problems. Things could be better. They
always can be better. But you're trying to convince yourself that things are a disaster, and the data just don't support that conclusion. Inflation is the only figure that I can find that is worse than 2019, but it is near the historical average of around 3%. The Fed targets about 2%. Hardly a disaster.
If Republicans want to address immigration, then let's do it. But they haven't wanted to since Reagan. Obama tried, but by then the Republican focus was not cooperating with Democrats on anything. Until Republicans want to address this seriously, instead of catchy one-liners ("build the wall, make Mexico pay for it"), nothing is going to change.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Let's talk Biden and his few years as president.
We know it is really bad when democrats are crying for Biden to stop the flow of illegals from all around the world.
Snip
'Shocking 3.8 million migrants have entered US since Biden took office ' 1.5 million sneaked in and are still here'
https://nypost.com/
No. of Recommendations: 0
I was musing with our daughter just last night that all the undocumented migrants should go home for six months. Just leave. And then us USA'ians would realize just how much we rely on those folks. The price of produce would skyrocket, just as one example.
The fallacy is that they have to be undocumented.
US has perfectly good guest worker programs for all levels, from farm workers to programmers. There are many fixable problems with these programs. No party is saying, let's fix the problems and at the same time, stop illegal immigration.
Republicans are saying "go back to where you came from" to any non-white they see on the street regardless of age and sex. Trump has emboldened the racist wing of Republicans and the moderates are dead.
Democrats love illegals, no point even hoping for anything there. Obama was the last Dem who actually did try to deport them seriously.
No. of Recommendations: 7
The Republican plan (H.R. 2) would build a wall and make it more difficult for unauthorized immigrants to find work.
Biden's plan is to address the root causes of migration, and also expand legal pathways while increasing consequences for illegal pathways.
U.S. sanctions on Cuba and Venezuela are forcing many to leave their countries. Global Warming and the long term effects of the 1980's Central America wars are also forcing many to migrate.
In January 2022 there were 11.4 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., lower than the peak of 12.2 million in 2007. Almost 1 in 5 workers last year were born outside the U.S. (including legally admitted immigrants, refugees, students, temporary workers, and undocumented immigrants). Immigrants today account for 14% of the U.S. population, nearly triple the share (5%) in 1970. However, today's immigrant share remains below the record 15% share in 1890.
But the U.S. Immigration Court backlog has grown from 0.4 million in 2015, to 1.1 million in 2019, to 2.1 million in 2023. And there are reports of 10,000 migrants a day heading to the US border.
No. of Recommendations: 13
No party is saying, let's fix the problems and at the same time, stop illegal immigration.
We *had* a bipartisan deal to do exactly that in 2013, sponsored by the so-called "Gang of Eight," that included Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, and the two AZ Senators, McCain and Flake. It passed the Senate with strong bipartisan support, but the GOP House refused to take it up.
Dems have offered, repeatedly, to revive it and work on it with the GOP. But the MAGAs won't touch it, because they *want* immigration to remain in crisis so that they can continue to blame Dems for the problem.
No. of Recommendations: 2
No. of Recommendations: 4
Dems have offered, repeatedly, to revive it and work on it with the GOP. But the MAGAs won't touch it, because they *want* immigration to remain in crisis so that they can continue to blame Dems for the problem.
To be fair, though, they also fundamentally disagree with the proposals of that 2013 bill. I mean, there was enough opposition to it from the GOP base voters ten years ago to torpedo it (and cost Mel Martinez his Senate seat) - that faction of the party has only grown more numerous and powerful today. Plus, the Democrats have also moved on immigration from where they were in 2013 - I don't know that the 2013 bill could get Democratic approval in the House today.
Sadly, there's probably just no "dealspace" on immigration right now. Nothing that the Democrats would agree to can get Republican approval; nothing that Republicans would agree to can get Democratic approval. So there will be no significant change to current immigration rules unless and until one or both of the parties shifts off their position - not as a negotiating point, but the range of what they might possibly agree to.
I agree with the sentiment of the OP, that the tactic of providing bus transportation to Blue cities has proven to be enormously effective in causing pain within the Democratic caucus on this issue. It may end up changing where the Democrats stand on immigration, pushing them back towards where they were in 2013.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Sadly, there's probably just no "dealspace" on immigration right now. This might be correct, although there have been bipartisan Congressional actions recently. Deals are being made. But the last time Congress passed immigration reform was in 1996. So don't hold your breath.
As an aside, Mel Martinez was a 1-term Senator who changed to a probably better job. Some people do not enjoy the DC environment, and so only serve one term. In 2004, "amnesty" was a hot button issue for some. Martinez flip flopped on "amnesty" and so lost support.
Most of the "Gang of Eight" that wrote S. 744 in 2013 are still serving Senators. Flake did not seek a second term. McCain won in 2016. The other six are still serving. This shows that writing a bipartisan immigration bill was not necessarily toxic in 2013. It might be toxic today.
On October 24, 2017, Jeff Flake (R-AZ) announced in a speech that he would not seek a second term in the Senate.
John McCain served as a United States senator from Arizona from 1987 until his death in 2018, and won the 2016 United States Senate election in Arizona.
Senator Michael Bennet is the senior United States senator from Colorado, a seat he has held since 2009.
Senator Richard Durbin is the senior United States senator from Illinois, a seat he has held since 1997.
Senator Lindsey Graham is the senior United States senator from South Carolina, a seat he has held since 2003.
Senator Robert Menendez is the senior United States senator from New Jersey, a seat he has held since 2006.
Senator Marco Rubio is the senior United States senator from Florida, a seat he has held since 2011.
Senator Charles Schumer is the senior United States senator from New York, a seat he has held since 1999.
=== links ===
Mel Martinez
"served as a United States Senator from Florida from 2005 to 2009... On December 2, 2008, Martinez announced he would not be running for re-election to the Senate in 2010. On August 7, 2009, CNN and the Orlando Sentinel reported that Martinez would be resigning from his Senate seat. Later that month, Governor Charlie Crist announced that he would appoint George LeMieux as the successor to Martinez for the remaining year and a half of the Senate term. Two weeks after Martinez resigned his Senate seat, The Hill reported that he would become a lobbyist and partner at international firm DLA Piper... In a 2006 after election platform reversal, he helped craft the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 that would be referred to by much of his own party as "amnesty"."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mel_Mart%C3%ADnez"The last time Congress passed immigration reform was in 1996, and that was driven by Republicans and signed into law by President Bill Clinton. That bill eliminated several legal immigration pathways, essentially making fewer people eligible for legal status while making more people deportable. Currently, multiple federal agencies are working to manage the border using the tools they have. But Congress needs to update our immigration laws, pure and simple. And it's not like Congress hasn't had the opportunity; over the last 10 years, 7 major pushes for immigration reform have failed:
-> In 2013, the Senate on a bipartisan basis passed the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013, but House Republicans refused to take up the bill.
-> In 2018, a bipartisan group of Senators advanced the Uniting and Securing America Act to protect Dreamers and provide pathway to citizenship, but Senate Republicans blocked it.
-> Again in 2018, the Senate tried to advance the United and Securing America Act 'Common Sense' Proposal Amendment, but Senate Republicans blocked it.
-> Yet again in 2018, the Uniting and Securing America Act made it to the Senate floor but was blocked.
-> In 2019, the House passed the American Dream and Promise Act, but Senate Republicans blocked it.
-> In 2021, the House again passed the American Dream and Promise Act, but Senate Republicans again blocked it.
-> In 2021 and 2022, the President proposed record funding for more border agents, more asylum officers, more immigration judges, more border technology, and more detention capacity. Republicans in Congress failed to fund these both requests. "
https://escobar.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx...
No. of Recommendations: 1
It may end up changing where the Democrats stand on immigration, pushing them back towards where they were in 2013.
Could you expand on that a bit?
No. of Recommendations: 2
As an aside, Mel Martinez was a 1-term Senator who changed to a probably better job. Some people do not enjoy the DC environment, and so only serve one term. In 2004, "amnesty" was a hot button issue for some. Martinez flip flopped on "amnesty" and so lost support.
OMG, I totally confused the 2003 immigration bill with the 2013 immigration bill.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Could you expand on that a bit?Sure!
Democrats used to be far more conservative on immigration than they are today - both among the rank and file and in party policy, as the following links show in varying ways:
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1688700093...https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/...https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-democrats...There are lots of reasons for that, but a mostly right explanation is that rising influence of latinos and college-educated progressives (which are not mutually exclusive) within the party caused a massive shift in how the coalition deals with immigration generally, and undocumented immigration specifically. So in the past, policies that once had some support (though not universally) within the Democratic coalition, like stringent workplace enforcement and swift deportation of border crossers, are more broadly condemned as having cruel and inhumane impacts on marginalized immigrant communities. The rank and file went from being just about indistinguishable from Republicans in terms of whether immigrants were a benefit to the country to being full-throated in support of immigration....while GOP attitudes remained generally static.
Part of the reason that was able to happen is that the status quo
worked. The system is broken, but in a way that is more acceptable to more people than any specific alternative set-up:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/01/magazine/econom...Mass relocation of asylum applicants changes that. Big blue states are getting hit with impacts that make the status quo untenable. It's all well and good to talk about addressing the root causes of migration, but none of those causes can be addressed on a time scale relevant to the problem (if they can be addressed at all by the U.S., since we don't have control over many of those factors).
If this keeps up, it may force a shift in what the party is willing to support in terms of immigration enforcement.
No. of Recommendations: 3
The immigrants I know tend NOT to be sympathetic to "illegals". Granted, a very small dataset. I know a few Latino immigrants, and a lot of Asian ones. Almost without exception, they support legal immigration. Most also seem to support applying for asylum, since many know that third-world countries can be dangerous places (wars, gangs, cartels, political imprisonment or assassination, etc). Even the harshest of those folks wouldn't have approved of separating families.
But I think all of them would be in favor of a reform. Nothing that would allow everyone a free pass, but something that establishes a sensible migrant worker system/visa**. My ex-employer utilized a e-verify system run by USCIS to make sure all employees were legal at all times. Expanding that to make it a requirement for all employers doesn't seem that much of a stretch. From what I know of my immigrant former colleagues views, they had no problem with that.
I think a few of them were in favor of "The Wall", but most were not because they realized it just wouldn't work (and would cost way too much, to boot). But even then, that would have been coupled with sensible reforms.
I know you live in a household that likely has some strong opinions. Am I wrong in thinking that they would be along similar lines?
I think it somewhat ironic that if the Republicans softened on immigration, supported reforms, they would get a LOT of new voters. Latinos tend to be pretty conservative, most coming from Catholic backgrounds. They mostly agree with Republican morality stances, just not immigration in particular.
**There already is one, but that system is cumbersome and inefficient.
No. of Recommendations: 3
But I think all of them would be in favor of a reform.
Almost everyone is in favor of a reform. But there is almost no specific package of reform that most people are in favor of.
Consider workplace enforcement. Most immigrant advocates and their allies in the Democratic base would denounce any such efforts, due to the effect that it would have on immigrant communities. If workplace enforcement is effective, undocumented immigrants would either be unable to work (inflicting penury and poverty on their households and their communities) or forced to work in far more precarious positions in the very underground economy.
You can see it now in NYC and Chicago. The problem isn't primarily that there are several tens of thousands of people moving there - it's that there are many people moving there that cannot legally work. That's straining their support and welfare systems to bursting. They can't handle that many people who depend entirely on the government for all their needs - especially housing. If you drove every undocumented migrant out of the workplace, you'd devastate entire communities.
Republicans want stricter enforcement, but are not willing to accept the level of legalization and permissive treatment of migrants already in America that the Democrats would insist on. Democrats want that legalization and path to citizenship - but are unwilling to accept the level of border security and workplace inspections that the Republicans would insist on. And for people that are in the mushy middle of immigration, they wouldn't accept either the GOP proposal (mostly enforcement) or the Democratic proposal (mostly legalization) - the status quo, which combines a mix of both, is preferable. For all sides, the current "no deal" is better than the best deal they could plausibly get from any other party.
Hence, the "no deal" wins.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Albaby: Sadly, there's probably just no "dealspace" on immigration right now.
lizgdAL: This might be correct, although there have been bipartisan Congressional actions recently. Deals are being made.
Thanks, Liz, I was agreeing with Albaby that chances of a deal looked bleak. The extremists in the Republican party have too much sway. I'll take some piecemeal deals if that's all we can get. Thanks for the history lesson BTW. I Just moved to Florida and am getting used to the landscape. So far, the drivers are worse than CA - more lane zippers and truckers who think they own the road.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Republicans want stricter enforcement, but are not willing to accept the level of legalization and permissive treatment of migrants already in America that the Democrats would insist on. Democrats want that legalization and path to citizenship - but are unwilling to accept the level of border security and workplace inspections that the Republicans would insist on.The 11 million undocumented immigrants within the United States are treated differently in the various bills. H.R. 2 does nothing on this issue. Both H.R. 3599 and S.744 provide paths to become documented. This is a major point of disagreement. Amnesty remains a hot button issue.
There are many points in agreement: E-Verify, more border fencing, more border security funding.
Dignity Act of 2023 (H.R. 3599)
Secure the Border Act of 2023 (H.R. 2)
The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013 (S.744)
=== links ===
"A controversial issue in the United States is whether undocumented immigrants should be granted some form of amnesty."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AmnestyImmigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
"While IRCA did not encourage illegal immigration, it failed to curb it... 'The Amnesty Effect: Evidence from the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act' found that the 'economic conditions in Mexico have the greatest impact on the flow of undocumented immigrants'"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_a...Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
"In February 2018 the Senate considered four bills to offer legal protection to people who came to the United States undocumented as children, but all four bills failed to pass."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_Action_for_...DREAM Act
"In a December 2010 report, the federal Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the November 30, 2010 version of the DREAM Act would reduce (federal) direct deficits by about $1.4 billion over the 2011'2020 period and increase federal government revenues by $2.3 billion over the next 10 years... A study conducted by the Center for American Progress estimates that if passed, the DREAM Act would create 1.4 million jobs by 2030, primarily through the expected increase in educational attainment, earnings, and buying power for 'DREAMers'."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DREAM_Act
No. of Recommendations: 1
FWIW, my MIL came over legally, but over age 65. She did not qualify for Medicare or Medicaid, and no SS. She could not (at least at that time) get food stamps (SNAP). Once she became a citizen, which was pretty quick, then she qualified for assistance.
I had no problem with that. It was a problem for us, but as a matter of policy, I didn't have an issue. People who are here illegally shouldn't have access to any benefits. Federal or state. But states can do what they like.
If you're here illegally, you shouldn't be able to work, nor should you be eligible for benefits. Go home and do it the right way. Albaby specified that if they can't get work, then the benefits system will be stressed. Solution: no benefits. That will stop most of the flow dead in its tracks.
That said, this all presupposes a sane, easy to navigate, efficient migrant worker visa system. Sans that, all bets are off. Oh...and a humane asylum system so people aren't waiting for months or years to get a hearing. It's not right that they be in limbo so long.
No. of Recommendations: 1
If this keeps up, it may force a shift in what the party is willing to support in terms of immigration enforcement.
and 3-2-1 BAM!
Headline: "BBC- "US President Joe Biden's administration is to build a section of border wall in southern Texas in an effort to stop rising levels of immigration.
Around 20 miles (32km) will be built in Starr County along its border with Mexico, where officials report high numbers of crossings.
Building a border wall was a signature policy of Donald Trump as president and fiercely opposed by Democrats.
In 2020, Mr Biden promised he would not build another foot of wall if elected."
No. of Recommendations: 0
Anti Immigrant Liberals......they are finding it hard to finally come out of the closet.
Is it pride or cheap labor?
No. of Recommendations: 2
liz The 11 million undocumented immigrants within the United States are treated differently in the various bills. H.R. 2 does nothing on this issue. Both H.R. 3599 and S.744 provide paths to become documented. This is a major point of disagreement. Amnesty remains a hot button issue.
There was a proposal for building a processing point in Mexico next to the Guatemalan border. That one interested me, though it would take too long to develop to have an effect now. Allowing work and lending financial support to states impacted by the busing would help but I don't think that's sustainable. We have to make it more enticing to stay on the other side of the border. So my proposal would be something like - if you're picked up on this side of the border, your admission processing gets delayed for a year, with humanitarian exceptions. We build the system processing just across the border and at the Guatemalan border.
I found in CA, that if someone were legalized, or one generation removed, they were more likely to not want illegal immigrants around. There's a lot of illegal/legal immigrant crime on illegal immigrants,not to mention immoral practices. They tend to live on porches, in garages, and balconies, contributing some to the rent, but more teenage girls get pregnant.
I know the small farmers need them and I'm sympathetic there; not requiring good pay because it just isn't there. We have a lot of low wage exceptions built into the system that look extremely difficult to address. Right now the busing is haphazard we need to stem the flow and coordinate any busing.
Every state, town, and city deserves immigrants! 😉 😜
No. of Recommendations: 1
So my proposal would be something like - if you're picked up on this side of the border, your admission processing gets delayed for a year, with humanitarian exceptions. We build the system processing just across the border and at the Guatemalan border. - lapsody
--------------
No deterrent to someone who was not going to his hearing anyway or did not have a hearing scheduled at all because he bypassed border control when he snuck in our country.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Around 20 miles (32km) will be built in Starr County along its border with Mexico, where officials report high numbers of crossings.
So they hike hundreds of miles to get to the border, and they're going to be deterred by an additional (at most) 20 mile detour to go around it? Doesn't make sense. I think he's caving to the simplistic "build the wall" rhetoric from the right. Maybe he is going senile, to propose such useless and expensive nonsense.
No. of Recommendations: 1
I found in CA, that if someone were legalized, or one generation removed, they were more likely to not want illegal immigrants around.
As I described in another post, in AZ I have found the same thing. They mostly don't like "illegals". If you do it "right", like they did, they had no issue.
No. of Recommendations: 0
If you're expecting a perfect solution, Mike, you won't get one. There isn't one. Even if we ignore the differing goals of the differing factions within this country (e.g. Trumpies want to keep them all out, moderates and lefties want differing levels of control).
Most people with hearing dates actually do show up. Very few skip them, because they know they have no chance if they miss their date. (i.e. they have to worry about being deported constantly, and for the rest of their time in this country)
No. of Recommendations: 1
So they hike hundreds of miles to get to the border, and they're going to be deterred by an additional (at most) 20 mile detour to go around it? Doesn't make sense. - 1pg
------------------
Rather than patrol a 20 mile stretch of open border with 100 agents, Border Patrol and put 20 agents at each end of the wall segment and greet the immigrants as they come around the ends. The longer it is, the more effective it is.
No. of Recommendations: 1
It was several years ago that I saw a documentary on border monitoring. We don't have to put 100 agents on the ground. We know when people cross the border. The tech was pretty impressive then. I'm sure it's more so now.
At most the wall slows them down a bit. Is it worth the investment, or could those funds be put to better use to achieve the same (or better) results? I recall you said you were a business man. Allocation of limited resources, yes? Businesses do that all the time.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Building a border wall was a signature policy of Donald Trump
--------------------------------
As I recall, Trump wasn't really interested in the wall until Ann Coulter wrote a piece that if he didn't build the wall, that would be his legacy - nothing. After he focused on the wall, it seemed the perfect distraction from his other failures, and skullduggery (borrowing from WTH) 💀
No. of Recommendations: 3
Fencing has long been used along the Southern border, but there is little evidence that it reduces border crossings. This has become a partisan issue. Effective border security is bipartisan, but there is disagreement about the effectiveness of a physical border. To some politicians, effectiveness is not needed, as the wall is only a symbol to rally around.
Maintaining 2000 miles of wall sounds expensive. What is the expected return on the 452 miles of Trump's wall? Maybe zero, because the migrants will just go to the gaps.
The Secure Fence Act of 2006 authorized the construction of 700 miles of fencing along the Mexican border. The Act received bipartisan support. DHS built 654 miles of fence during Obama's administration.
An additional 52 miles of wall were built during Trump's administration, with 452 total miles built, much of it replacing outdated existing barriers.
For FY 2019, Congress appropriated $1.4B for the construction of border fencing. The Biden administration is spending that money for its allocated purpose. Biden continues to say border walls do not work.
=== links ===
click and zoom on the map to see more information about the Border Wall System
https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/along-us-borde...Biden says border walls don't work as administration bypasses laws to build more barriers in South Texas, October 5, 2023
"the money was appropriated for the border wall. I tried to get them to reappropriate it, to redirect that money. They didn't, they wouldn't. And in the meantime, there's nothing under the law other than they have to use the money for what it was appropriated. I can't stop that,' Biden told reporters in the Oval Office. Asked whether he believes the border wall works, Biden answered, "No.'
https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/05/politics/biden-admi...CBP Moves Forward on RGV Barrier and Yuma Andrade and El Centro Calexico Fence Replacement Projects to Mitigate Immediate Life, Safety and Operational Risks, 06/30/2023
"Today, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) authorized U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to move forward with the planning and execution of up to approximately 20 miles of border barrier system, with steel bollard panels placed in U.S. Border Patrol's (USBP) Rio Grande Valley (RGV) Sector, as mandated by the DHS Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 border barrier appropriation... The Administration continues to call on Congress to cancel or reappropriate remaining border barrier funding and instead fund smarter border security measures, like border technology and modernization of land ports of entry, that are proven to be more effective at improving safety and security at the border."
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-media-release/c...Pause of Border Wall Funding, May 6, 2021
"President Biden's January 20 Proclamation did not in any way defy Congress. To the
contrary, the Proclamation represented an important step to align Executive Branch actions with
the policies Congress established in its appropriations legislation. By terminating the national
emergency that had provided the predicate for diverting military construction funds to the border
wall, the Proclamation ensured that those funds would return to the purposes for which Congress
had originally appropriated them"
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021...The Biden administration says it may restart construction of the border wall, Apr 7, 2021
"Biden had pledged to halt construction, but the homeland security chief said "gaps" needed filling.
The White House press secretary said "limited funding" had been allocated to construction."
https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-restart-bord...Biden Would End Border Wall Construction, But Wouldn't Tear Down Trump's Additions, August 5, 2020
""There will not be another foot of wall constructed on my administration, No. 1," he told NPR's Lulu Garcia-Navarro during an interview with journalists from the National Association of Black Journalists and National Association of Hispanic Journalists.
"I'm going to make sure that we have border protection, but it's going to be based on making sure that we use high-tech capacity to deal with it. And at the ports of entry ' that's where all the bad stuff is happening," the former vice president said during the virtual interview on Tuesday.
Biden committed to fully ending land confiscations, a more aggressive stance than President Barack Obama took when he came into office after President George W. Bush had approved border fencing to be built in the Southwest.
"End. Stop. Done. Over. Not going to do it. Withdraw the lawsuits. We're out. We're not going to confiscate the land," Biden told Garcia-Navarro.
Obama oversaw the construction of a fence along the Southern border following Bush's signing of the Secure Fence Act in 2006. As the Austin American-Statesman reported, the Department of Homeland Security built 654 miles of fence at a cost of $2.4 billion. Significant amounts of private land were seized by the federal government for to clear space for the barrier. "
https://www.npr.org/2020/08/05/899266045/biden-wou...Secure Fence Act of 2006
"A 2019 National Bureau of Economic Research paper by Dartmouth College and Stanford University economists found that the "total impact of the border wall expansion including all general equilibrium adjustments was to reduce the (long-run) number of Mexican workers residing in the United States by about 50,000, a decline of approximately 0.4%.""
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_...Mexico'United States border wall
"Between the physical barriers, security is provided by a "virtual fence" of sensors, cameras, and other surveillance equipment used to dispatch United States Border Patrol agents to suspected migrant crossings. In May 2011, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stated that it had 649 miles of barriers in place. An additional 52 miles of primary barriers were built during Donald Trump's presidency. The total length of the national border is 1,954 miles, of which 1,255 miles is the Rio Grande and 699 miles is on land. On July 28, 2022, the Biden administration announced it would fill four wide gaps in Arizona near Yuma, an area with some of the busiest corridors for illegal crossings."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93Unite...
No. of Recommendations: 1
U.S. Customs and Border Protection Budget FY22: $16B
Estimated costs: complete the wall $100B, annual maintenance $15B
Estimated effectiveness: a 2000 mile well-maintained wall might reduce migration by 20%.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Oh, yes. I lived in SoCal and have seen the fencing long before Trump came into the picture. There are areas where it helps a bit, but just assists the border patrol. Like anything else, we can't afford to catch every single illegal alien coming into the US. But, in cost effective vs symbolic wall for the Republican base, symbolism wins.
But we do things like arrest people for leaving water bottles out for those crossing. Disheartening. Don't need no good book if it's thrown at the poor. I lived in Panama for four years and went to school there as a kid. I prefer mixed neighborhoods and partly workingmen vs the sterile upscale ones. I think my wife finally understands that.
I know that many of the immigrants have better morals than some Americans. They can live in part of my neighborhood.
No. of Recommendations: 0
BHM: No deterrent to someone who was not going to his hearing anyway or did not have a hearing scheduled at all because he bypassed border control when he snuck in our country.
You do realize that for some people there is never any deterrent? The question is, just what is the percentage of total border immigrants. I don't want to have jails full of people whose only crime was to try and come here, but some do deserve jail or deportation.
No. of Recommendations: 1
>>BHM: No deterrent to someone who was not going to his hearing anyway or did not have a hearing scheduled at all because he bypassed border control when he snuck in our country.<<
You do realize that for some people there is never any deterrent? The question is, just what is the percentage of total border immigrants. I don't want to have jails full of people whose only crime was to try and come here, but some do deserve jail or deportation. - Lapsody
---------------
I agree with you so long as is is the US who decides who is allowed in and who isn't. Right now it is the immigrants and the cartels who largely make that decision.
