Depraved beyond meaure is an understatement. That Repubicans are, by default, siding with Putin the agressor and using the border crisis as a pretext to withhold additional aid is reprehensible. It also threatens stability in the region and gives Putin permission to continue his push for a new Soviet empire.
Linking the border issue with aid to Ukraine is a duplicitous, and dangerous position. How about a stand alone vote on aid to Ukraine and a stand alone vote on a Republican plan to solve the crisis at the border.
Because Republicans know that a stand alone vote on a Republican plan to solve the cirsis at the border will be voted down by Dems in the Senate (if Schumer allows it to come to the floor for a vote at all). Dems don't want to work with the GOP AT ALL.
Which is why there was a request for funding for border security in the bill?
The issue is that enough of the GOP wants to further limit/cease migration rather than reforming the system to make legal migration easier/faster or to process asylum claims in a timely manner.
Claiming asylum is part of our legal immigration system.
It would violate the law to stop said claims from occurring.
We have two issues: the system as a whole needs reform, and it is severely underfunded. The latter issue is fairly easy to resolve: provide more funding to process legal immigration claims. The former issue will require much more work, though using the 2013 reform bill as a basis should help.
You are correct. Republicans do wish to limit immigration, hopefully to make it a net positive instead of a drag on the welfare system, the healthcare system and the education system. Biden wants to spend even more to accommodate illegals already here.
Fair enough. Legal immigration should be limited in order to allow proper vetting of self-sufficiency, ability to assimilate (including language skills), and character. Limited to parents and children family units only.
The number of asylum seekers admitted should be limited to specific number to ensure that all nations are getting their fair share. Asylum seekers do not necessarily bring anything of value to our society. They can be granted asylum for fear of persecution which should not even be considered unless their native country is shown to be guilty of such practices - just an item on a checklist. If border security were a budget priority, democrats would agree to diverting some of the funds from their social and climate programs so that immigration judges and clerks could hired. I wonder how many could be paid using the five billion dollars allocated for EV charging stations.
I have neither the interest nor the energy to follow the boarder debate. However i do start every morning on the Bulwark and rely on their more than capable team of writers to fill in the blank spaces. Yesterday, Johnathan V Last (JVL) covered the topic in detail. Here's two cuts that refute the argument the dem's have done nothing to resolve the border battle:
The first is a reprint from Joe Perticone: "Schumer offered Republicans a zero-conditions amendment to the bill to allow for a vote on whatever immigration or border enforcement policy they wanted. “This is a golden opportunity for Republicans to present whatever border policy they want, and our side will not interfere with the construction of that amendment in any way,” Schumer said during his floor remarks on Wednesday. Unfortunately, this grand gesture to the minority didn’t change the outcome of the vote on the supplement. It only served as one more reminder of the current reality: that Republicans are not acting in good faith."
The second, is JVL take immediately after Biden took office: "Did you know that a few hours after his inauguration on January 20, 2021, Joe Biden submitted a comprehensive immigration plan to Congress? Republicans didn’t even deign to respond because they need immigration to be a problem."
You tell me who is playing games and who wants to actually solve these two pressing issues.
Biden's plan was to make life better for the illegals already here and to expedite immigration and asylum claims. No border control except for technology changes and increasing penalties for cartels who are seldom arrested at higher levels. Address root cause by sending Kamala to deal with it. The Republicans should have offered a substitute bill, but we would still be exactly where we are today.
Come on Curtis, we know every bill proposed ultimately becomes a negotiated process where there is give and take, back and forth. Oh wait, the republican's have no (zero, nada, zip) in finding reasonable solutions. They simply are looking for campaign issues. I guess that's why they want to have their coronation for the good king donald. That way all that pesky negotiations can go away and he can just pass proclamations.
I read again last night that Russia bombed in Kiev and injured 53 and took out a hospital. Where is the outrage? When it happens in Gaza people lose their minds. It’s been happening in Ukraine forever. I don’t get it. I totally agree that the border is a critical issue but I believe Putin won’t stop at Ukraine. Not getting our boys in a war is important too, right? How many years have we heard suggestions that people should be allowed to apply to asylum in their own countries instead of coming here? I hear interviews where immigrants say they are told go to America, they won’t deport or refuse entry to asylum seekers. That feels like a great place to start! And yes I have asked my reps to do something about that issue.
Good report, Steve. You've probably been following Streiff's commentary on RedState that present excellent arguments for better support of Ukraine and how the actual cost is more reasonable than generally reported. Here's the latest. The President and congressional democrats evidently have spending priorities other than Ukraine and the southern border. Some conservative Republicans in congress add even more conflict to the process by being short-sighted and isolationist regarding Ukraine.
Well explained and simply written. Thank you.
Depraved beyond meaure is an understatement. That Repubicans are, by default, siding with Putin the agressor and using the border crisis as a pretext to withhold additional aid is reprehensible. It also threatens stability in the region and gives Putin permission to continue his push for a new Soviet empire.
Linking the border issue with aid to Ukraine is a duplicitous, and dangerous position. How about a stand alone vote on aid to Ukraine and a stand alone vote on a Republican plan to solve the crisis at the border.
Because Republicans know that a stand alone vote on a Republican plan to solve the cirsis at the border will be voted down by Dems in the Senate (if Schumer allows it to come to the floor for a vote at all). Dems don't want to work with the GOP AT ALL.
Which is why there was a request for funding for border security in the bill?
The issue is that enough of the GOP wants to further limit/cease migration rather than reforming the system to make legal migration easier/faster or to process asylum claims in a timely manner.
The border is overrun. Security first, then we can talk about reforms to our LEGAL immigration system.
Claiming asylum is part of our legal immigration system.
It would violate the law to stop said claims from occurring.
We have two issues: the system as a whole needs reform, and it is severely underfunded. The latter issue is fairly easy to resolve: provide more funding to process legal immigration claims. The former issue will require much more work, though using the 2013 reform bill as a basis should help.
Most asylum claims are invalid and could be disposed of quickly.
Which involves having enough personnel to process said claims.
This partially explains the differences between Republicans and democrats on the border security issue.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/democratic-us-senator-says-republican-border-security-demands-are-currently-2023-12-10/
You are correct. Republicans do wish to limit immigration, hopefully to make it a net positive instead of a drag on the welfare system, the healthcare system and the education system. Biden wants to spend even more to accommodate illegals already here.
Asylum seekers are following legal processes, and if the GOP wants to limit legal immigration then they should be honest about it.
Fair enough. Legal immigration should be limited in order to allow proper vetting of self-sufficiency, ability to assimilate (including language skills), and character. Limited to parents and children family units only.
The number of asylum seekers admitted should be limited to specific number to ensure that all nations are getting their fair share. Asylum seekers do not necessarily bring anything of value to our society. They can be granted asylum for fear of persecution which should not even be considered unless their native country is shown to be guilty of such practices - just an item on a checklist. If border security were a budget priority, democrats would agree to diverting some of the funds from their social and climate programs so that immigration judges and clerks could hired. I wonder how many could be paid using the five billion dollars allocated for EV charging stations.
There was literally a request for funds to pay for more immigration judges and clerks in the bill.
I have neither the interest nor the energy to follow the boarder debate. However i do start every morning on the Bulwark and rely on their more than capable team of writers to fill in the blank spaces. Yesterday, Johnathan V Last (JVL) covered the topic in detail. Here's two cuts that refute the argument the dem's have done nothing to resolve the border battle:
The first is a reprint from Joe Perticone: "Schumer offered Republicans a zero-conditions amendment to the bill to allow for a vote on whatever immigration or border enforcement policy they wanted. “This is a golden opportunity for Republicans to present whatever border policy they want, and our side will not interfere with the construction of that amendment in any way,” Schumer said during his floor remarks on Wednesday. Unfortunately, this grand gesture to the minority didn’t change the outcome of the vote on the supplement. It only served as one more reminder of the current reality: that Republicans are not acting in good faith."
The second, is JVL take immediately after Biden took office: "Did you know that a few hours after his inauguration on January 20, 2021, Joe Biden submitted a comprehensive immigration plan to Congress? Republicans didn’t even deign to respond because they need immigration to be a problem."
You tell me who is playing games and who wants to actually solve these two pressing issues.
"Did you know that a few hours after his inauguration on January 20, 2021, Joe Biden submitted a comprehensive immigration plan to Congress?"
Is this the plan you speak of? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/20/biden-immigration-reform-trump-executive-order
Here's the WH version. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/01/20/fact-sheet-president-biden-sends-immigration-bill-to-congress-as-part-of-his-commitment-to-modernize-our-immigration-system/
Here's more from the Immigration Forum. https://immigrationforum.org/article/u-s-citizenship-act-of-2021-bill-summary/
Biden's plan was to make life better for the illegals already here and to expedite immigration and asylum claims. No border control except for technology changes and increasing penalties for cartels who are seldom arrested at higher levels. Address root cause by sending Kamala to deal with it. The Republicans should have offered a substitute bill, but we would still be exactly where we are today.
Come on Curtis, we know every bill proposed ultimately becomes a negotiated process where there is give and take, back and forth. Oh wait, the republican's have no (zero, nada, zip) in finding reasonable solutions. They simply are looking for campaign issues. I guess that's why they want to have their coronation for the good king donald. That way all that pesky negotiations can go away and he can just pass proclamations.
I know why you included a subjective term, "reasonable", in your response. It's like "beauty".
Expediting immigration and asylum claims - which are legal immigration methods - will make it more likely that people come via legal means.
Technology is the best way to deal with the border in remote areas: use remote surveillance and dispatch local teams as necessary.
I read again last night that Russia bombed in Kiev and injured 53 and took out a hospital. Where is the outrage? When it happens in Gaza people lose their minds. It’s been happening in Ukraine forever. I don’t get it. I totally agree that the border is a critical issue but I believe Putin won’t stop at Ukraine. Not getting our boys in a war is important too, right? How many years have we heard suggestions that people should be allowed to apply to asylum in their own countries instead of coming here? I hear interviews where immigrants say they are told go to America, they won’t deport or refuse entry to asylum seekers. That feels like a great place to start! And yes I have asked my reps to do something about that issue.
Good report, Steve. You've probably been following Streiff's commentary on RedState that present excellent arguments for better support of Ukraine and how the actual cost is more reasonable than generally reported. Here's the latest. The President and congressional democrats evidently have spending priorities other than Ukraine and the southern border. Some conservative Republicans in congress add even more conflict to the process by being short-sighted and isolationist regarding Ukraine.
https://redstate.com/streiff/2023/12/12/most-ukraine-aid-upgrades-our-defense-industrial-base-so-why-are-its-opponents-so-determined-to-end-it-n2167461
Actually I haven’t read streiff’s coverage. I rarely read RedState anymore. I’ll check it out. Streiff is a good guy.