Having only a handful of politicians from one side has apparently now become the definition of bipartisan.
Biden considering new executive action to restrict asylum at the border, sources say
- Thread starter NorthernHawkeye
- Start date
Having only a handful of politicians from one side has apparently now become the definition of bipartisan.
yeah...it worked...like the little dutch boy with his finger in the levee worked
remain in mexico was and always will be a band aid. it is not a serious long term solution to our immigration problem.
I don’t recognize your username. Assuming you spend most of your time on the sports boards.
I normally ask politely to refrain from using any form of the R word. Most of us are adults here. If you regularly use that word irl, then simply say so and I’ll know to block you.
Some of us actually have a child with special needs and that word, even using a form of it is very hurtful and offensive.
Be better than that.
A republican and democrat co-wrote the bill. Can you explain how to be more bipartisan?
How about having the Senate actually pass it?,... at this point it's nothing more than legislative masturbation...
Northern is arguing the definition of bipartisan and I am asking what is considered more bipartisan than a bill co-written by both parties?
Just because it’s bipartisan doesn’t make it a good bill. It does not solve the border issue we currently have. I’m disappointed in the senate republicans who approve of it. I’m even more disappointed in the current WH administration who enabled the current border crisis. It’s fvcking ridiculous that the democrats are finally attempting to address the border. Only because it’s an election year.
I will actually answer this question. When I asked the same question about H.R.2., repeatedly, not a single response from Democrats. I actually did get one response that pointed to sections of the bill, but they didn’t bother to explain why they didn’t like those sections.
First, it allows 1.5M per year (3,999 per day) before the govt can shut down the border. Note the word “can”. It’s actually 4,999 per day, or nearly 2M per year before the govt MUST close the border. In my opinion, that is still too many.
The bill does almost nothing to address the illegals already here waiting for their asylum hearing. Right now the average is 4.3 years.
It does not address what will happen if and when we do close the border. Will the encampments return to the Mexican side of the border? Will the immigrants simply just wait it out until the administration opens it back up? Will those waiting simply decide to cross in other areas and slip into the U.S. undetected?
But it's the final vote tally that truly identifies any piece of legislation as bipartisan...
Almost nobody requesting asylum actually qualifies. Asylum is there for good reason. Navalny could have qualified, as he was clearly facing persecution in his own country and was in danger. We'd give north Koreans asylum if they got here because they're living under an oppressive regime. if the government has declared you an enemy because you have practiced free speech, we'd grant you asylum...
Most people are just coming for a better life, and that's fantastic but they can't just show up and say the cartel wants them dead...there's a legal process they need to follow, and they shouldn't simply be told...well, here's your court date, enjoy America until it comes...
Anyway, there's a serious answer to your not so serious quip.
but that legal process means that determining whether or not someone qualifies can't be done by a border patrol agent or a politician.
there is a process to denying asylum...one of the good things about the proposed senate bill is that it made that denial process much easier
the status quo is what allows people to easily exploit the asylum system...the longer we maintain that status quo, the longer that abuse and exploitation of the system occurs
It also made the approval process much easier,... And since the new process provided with this bill was largely going to be managed by border staff selected by the administration, there's no reason to believe that they would not be taking their direction from the administration.
Which, in my opinion gives the President too much power over the border. It gives Biden too much and would certainly give the next too much as well. Would we see wild swings in border policies every 4 to 8 years?
Similar threads
