Biden's Immigration Reform

[Edward64]

I wouldn't consider this a "major" immigration bill. But you point is taken about the shitshow.

He should have come up with this idea months ago before mid-terms when he/Dems owned both the House & Senate. Now, he'll have to wait for X months for things to calm down and try.

[Edward64]

Somewhat too strong of an approach IMO but guess Abbott is pissed.



It's good they shook hands. Looking forward to details as McCarthy & Joe work through it.

The brief but what appeared to be a cordial exchange between Biden and Abbott was picked up by television news cameras but their remarks were not. Biden appeared to read the letter, before folding it and offering the governor a final handshake before moving on to greet others who turned out to meet him during his short stay in El Paso.

[Lathum]

Abbot isn't pissed. It is all performance art.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Abbot isn't pissed. It is all performance art.

I think he is pissed. But it is also political theatre

[flere-imsaho]

Abbott's part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Overshadowed by the drama in the House, Biden announced a limited, focused proposal. I like it, think its a good compromise personally.

Access Denied

I like this policy, it's a compromise to the upcoming sunset of Title 42 but shows Biden acknowledges there's a problem without something else.

I believe I read somewhere this new policy does NOT apply to unaccompanied minors but did not see that in the article below. So unsure if it made the final cut. If it does not apply to unaccompanied minors, I think we'll see a spike of (no surprise) unaccompanied minors asking for asylum. This will be asking the parents to make a horrible choice, decision. I hope it's been left off.

Biden to replace Trump migration policy with Trump-esque asylum policy - POLITICO

As the White House gears up for the end of one Trump-era border policy this spring, it has its sights set on resurrecting a version of another much-maligned immigration program put in place under the previous administration.

The Departments of Homeland Security and Justice on Tuesday announced a proposed rule that will bar some migrants from applying for asylum in the U.S. if they cross the border illegally or fail to first apply for safe harbor in another country.

May 11 is also the end date of the Title 42 public health order currently being used to bar entry to most migrants at the southern border. The rule announced on Tuesday would stay in place for two years following its effective date.

[Edward64]

Good luck this Thu Joe.

Southern border braces for migrant surge with just days to go before Title 42 expires | CNN

US Customs and Border Protection has already seen an uptick in migrants crossing the border with Mexico, with more than 8,000 daily encounters, according to a Homeland Security official – a number that officials predict could reach 10,000 once Title 42 is lifted. There are around 25,000 migrants in custody, the official said, straining processing facilities that are already over capacity.

“I think that there is no question that this is going to be extremely challenging,” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said Friday in Brownsville, Texas, during a visit to the Rio Grande Valley. “I do not want to understate the severity of the challenge that we expect to encounter.”

But deep down, I doubt the government really is ready for this crisis. Hope I'm pleasantly surprised.

But federal officials have long been preparing for the end of Title 42, Mayorkas stressed, saying the government was ready.

“We have a plan. We are executing on that plan.”

[Lathum]

Title 42, like the Afghanistan withdrawal, was always going to be a mess. Another gift from the Trump era that continues to give.

[JPhillips]

The estimate is ten-thousand people on the first day. Ellis Island used to do five-thousand a day. At a time when young teenagers are being worked in meat plants, we should welcome the potential economic growth the immigrants represent.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The estimate is ten-thousand people on the first day. Ellis Island used to do five-thousand a day. At a time when young teenagers are being worked in meat plants, we should welcome the potential economic growth the immigrants represent.

But they take away jobs from hard working Americans!

[Edward64]

Let's process all the ones in progress first, legal ones first. After all, no one likes someone cutting in line.

FWIW, I'm not sure I believe the 20M below but there is a significant number.

https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis...es%20in%202022.

The agencies responsible for the legal immigration system are failing to process applications promptly, creating immense backlogs for visas and other immigration benefits. More than 20 million applications are stuck in backlogs, and no relief is in sight. This backlog is separating U.S. citizens from their families and keeping open jobs unfilled across the country. Although the pandemic and the Trump administration exacerbated these problems, inefficiencies have plagued the U.S. system for decades.

[Edward64]

Looks like it's not as bad as expected. I'll take it with a grain of salt and give it more time to play out, but apparently good job so far.

The end of Title 42 brought fewer than expected migrants to the border, but officials remain on high alert | CNN

There were about 6,300 border encounters on Friday, and 4,200 on Saturday, Mayorkas said, adding that the number stood at around 10,000 before the policy ended.

[Lathum]

The right wing talking point on this is there are tens of thousands and we have just stopped counting.

You literally can not win with these people.

[Edward64]

A nice surprise. For all the naysayers about zero chance for an immigration bill compromise, I present the "Dignity Act". You may still be right, but I'm thinking (okay, hoping really) you are wrong.

Really don't know if this will be pushed now or after the next election (my guess is the latter), but good sign there has been bi-partisanship groundwork laid out for comprehensive reform/compromise now.

Congress Introduces Sweeping Immigration Reform Bill ‘DIGNIDAD Act’ to Address Systematic Challenges

On May 23, members of Congress introduced what has sadly become an increasingly rare bit of legislation; a comprehensive immigration reform bill aimed at addressing large-scale systematic problems with large-scale systematic action. The “DIGNIDAD (Dignity) Act” represents one of the most sweeping attempts to modify the immigration system that has been proposed in years.

Like many such proposals, the bill is grounded in the principle of trading increased enforcement (primarily at the border) for changes to the legal immigration system and a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants. While many recent attempts to reach similar compromises have been much more limited, the DIGNIDAD Act would provide a path to status for nearly all undocumented immigrants

[Edward64]

The above article is nice summary but below has more details.

The Dignity Act: Bill Summary - National Immigration Forum

Of interest to me ...

Border Security: Barriers and Technology. Authorizes $25 billion, available in segments until fiscal year (FY) 2031, to complete “an impenetrable border infrastructure system.” This system would include physical barriers and barrier levees. It would also include associated detection technology, roads, lighting, and technology to fully secure the border.

There an additional $10B+ in another paragraph. If the $35B can really "secure" the border, it'll be money well spent. I'm guessing it'll need more though.

The bill incorporates a version of the Dream Act, which allows young undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children and have lived in the U.S. for most of their lives to obtain legal status. This section could allow up to 1.9 million Dreamers, including the roughly 600,000 DACA recipients, to live and work in the U.S.

Dreamers are in

Dignity Program. The bill establishes a seven-year deferred action program that would grant employment and travel authorization to undocumented residents who have been continuously in the U.S. for at least five years before the bill was enacted. Under the program, participants must pay a fine and contribute to the American Worker Fund.

The approx 11M illegals are in

The bill would create a new uncapped temporary worker visa program for current unauthorized farmworkers called Certified Agricultural Worker (CAW) status. CAW visas would be renewable and five-and-a-half years in length.

Guest workers are in (increased)

Mandatory E-Verify. The bill would require employers to attest, under penalty of perjury, that they have verified that a potential employee is not an undocumented immigrant ... The bill would increase civil and criminal penalties for persons engaged in a pattern of systemic violations.

Nice. Trying to address the demand side.

Elimination of Backlogs. The legal visa backlog is reduced to a maximum of 10 years. Individuals who have been waiting in the backlog (either family or employment-based) for over ten years will receive that visa.

Yeah, I'll believe this when it really happens.

F-1 Visas for International Students. The bill would change F student visas, reserved for international students, to be dual intent visas. In other words, international students would no longer be required to demonstrate their intention to go back to their home countries after completing their studies.

Nice

O-Visa Eligibility. The bill would create a presumption of eligibility for an O visa, reserved for individuals with extraordinary ability, for students who have earned a doctoral degree in a STEM-related or medical field.

This is ... absolutely fantastic. I think an argument can be made to apply this for doctoral degrees other than STEM and medical, and to graduate STEM degrees (e.g. I can see MS degrees from top colleges being worthy of consideration also). But overall, a great step to bringing in more brainy immigrants. I was concerned any bill would not focus on the highly educated.

Some additional items that I did not read in the bill summary but IMO worthy of consideration

• Reforming current H-1B quotas & process
• Allowing for a better skills based immigration (other than doctoral STEM and medical). An example is Nurses, we've had a shortage since the 90's
• Didn't see anything about creating a centralized database & processes to track all in/out visitors, including legal & illegal immigrants. But may be embedded in all the other stuff

In summary, although there are stuff that both sides like and don't like, this is a great starting point for further negotiations, finetuning, and compromise over the next 1-3 years. Really hope it gets done.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by Edward64

For all the naysayers about zero chance for an immigration bill compromise, I present the "Dignity Act". You may still be right, but I'm thinking (okay, hoping really) you are wrong.

FWIW I'm hoping I'm wrong also. But I think the only time this kind of thing has *any* chance is shortly after a presidential election that has a moderate mandate-or-stronger result. We haven't had one of those since Obama and I don't expect that to change soon.

Going into a presidential election, this strikes me as a good thing to try and then say 'give us more support in Congress and we'll try again' after it fails. Something that can pass in a divided government though ... yeah I'll believe it when I see it.

I don't think you could get a majority of both parties for a joint resolution affirming that the sun is warm.

[Edward64]

You may be right. Just speculating for getting something done now vs post 2024 ...

• I can see both sides claiming victory if done before 2024 election. There are enough goodies for both sides to play with their base
• Dems should be concerned that Joe won't win 2nd term and possibly/likely lose the Senate. So they'll be in a weaker negotiating position post 2024.
• GOP are prob less willing to deal now vs post 2024. But may want to strike while the iron is hot. They are going to get "a Wall" of sorts. Bird in hand and all that.

I hope we start hearing feedback from Congress & Joe. I just want to get serious discussions started now.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Edward64

The approx 11M illegals are in

What is the "American Workers Fund"?

It sounds to me like "The Human Fund"

ETA: Or maybe I should just read the link

American Worker Fund. The bill establishes a fund with contributions from the Dignity and Redemption Programs. The fund would manage grants to states and organizations to help U.S. citizens looking for work or transitioning to different careers. The grants would cover apprenticeships, work-based earn-and-learn programs, and educational opportunities for high-demand careers. The bill aims to cover the upskill or to retrain at least one American worker for every participant in the Dignity Program.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

What is the "American Workers Fund"

It sounds to me like "The Human Fund"

As I read it, take money from undocumented and give it to US citizens for retraining. Essentially a bucket to store the fines, fees etc. from the undocumented.

American Worker Fund. The bill establishes a fund with contributions from the Dignity and Redemption Programs.

The fund would manage grants to states and organizations to help U.S. citizens looking for work or transitioning to different careers. The grants would cover apprenticeships, work-based earn-and-learn programs, and educational opportunities for high-demand careers. The bill aims to cover the upskill or to retrain at least one American worker for every participant in the Dignity Program.

[NobodyHere]

I think that bolded part is highly optimistic. How much money are you going to take from an undocumented worker? How much money do they make? I imagine its on the lower end of the pay scale.

[JPhillips]

As has been the case since Bush2, there's no way the far right lets this reach the House floor even if it has enough votes to pass. The rules on changing the speaker ensure that the Freedom Caucus gets the final say.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I think that bolded part is highly optimistic. How much money are you going to take from an undocumented worker? How much money do they make? I imagine its on the lower end of the pay scale.

I'm not clear on all the details but article says at least $5K over 7 years. In addition, they have below requirements ...

Requires participants to pay taxes and enroll in health coverage, while barring use of any federal means-tested benefits or entitlement programs.

You are right, using the 80-20 rule, I suspect the 80% won't be able to pay the fees without help.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I think that bolded part is highly optimistic. How much money are you going to take from an undocumented worker? How much money do they make? I imagine its on the lower end of the pay scale.

I'm going to say you would really be surprised. The jobs they work usually are 12-14 hours a day, 6 days a week, and are well above minimum wage. They are just the dirty/nasty jobs (roofing, chicken plucking and cleaning, farm labor, etc) that Americans aren't willing to do. I still remember talking with a large group of undocumented workers in Alabama in the late 90's. They worked in the chicken plants making $16-18 dollars an hour on 12 hour shifts. They would go pay cash for a new truck, drive it a couple of years, and then send it to Mexico for their families to sell at huge profits and buy a new one.

The fiction that these are lazy moochers living off the government is so far from the truth it is just blatantly racist.

[Flasch186]

Wanna see unbelievable inflation and watch the consumers cry?

Dislocate all of the immigrants here and then try to fill those jobs all the while production efficiency will crater.

Strawberries will double in price etc etc

The stock prices will drop and the companies will cry and blame democrats 🤦‍♂️

It’s all about maga now and then cry later


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Don't think Joe's plan is working out too well.

Just a moment...

August brought another overwhelming wave of migration at the U.S.-Mexico border — including a record number of family members crossing illegally, according to government data released Friday.

Why it matters: After initial optimism that President Biden's new policies were working, immigration officials are again scrambling.

What's happening: 233,000 migrants and asylum seekers attempted to cross the U.S.-Mexico border last month without proper visas.

181,000 people crossed the border illegally last month — the highest monthly number since before pandemic policies were replaced by new carrot-and-stick measures in May.

Seems like Venezuelans are the key group.

A startling 82,000 migrants took the often-deadly journey through the Darién last month. Nearly 63,000 of them were Venezuelans, according to Panamanian data.

Venezuelans have long been a particularly challenging demographic. The country's authoritarian regime doesn't cooperate with U.S. efforts to deport Venezuelans — leaving U.S. officials few options once migrants arrive.

Article also had below interesting quote. Second quote is additional googling. Not sure how much of this could have been prevented/reduced if Menendez was more amiable to Joe's plan.

The intrigue: For months, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) has blocked Biden from using funds to assist other countries in deporting Venezuelans before they reach the U.S.

Menendez has been especially critical of a new rule that refuses asylum to migrants who enter the U.S. illegally without first seeking protection in a country they traveled through to get to the United States.

"I am afraid that the president will become the asylum denier-in-chief,” Menendez said on NBC in March, after reports the administration was considering restarting migrant family detentions.

[Edward64]

re: Dignity Act.

Haven't found any relevant articles on progress or status since July. Not surprised there's not movement at this stage. Nice if this was a Top-5 priority for Joe's next term. If Joe loses or is not a priority, another wasted opportunity.

[Edward64]

This should help alleviate the illegal crossings. Article doesn't say what, if anything, Mexico gets from US but assume there's a price.

Mexico makes agreement with US to deport migrants from its border cities amid ongoing surge in illegal migration | CNN

Mexico has made an agreement with the United States to deport migrants from its border cities to their home countries and take several actions to deter migrants as part of a new effort to combat the recent surge in border crossings.
:
As part of the agreement, Mexico agreed to “depressurize” its northern cities, which border the El Paso, San Diego and Eagle Pass, Texas, where the mayor has declared a state of emergency. They will also implement more than a dozen actions to prevent migrants from risking their lives by using the railway system to reach the US-Mexico border, according to Mexico’s National Migration Institute.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Title 42, like the Afghanistan withdrawal, was always going to be a mess. Another gift from the Trump era that continues to give.

The surge is Trump’s responsibility? The Afghan chaotic and complete failure was Trump’s responsibility? Inflation too, I suppose. Inner city test scores hitting new tragic lows? Foreign policy failures must be Trump too. And Biden has been powerless to stop or fix any of this? Hopefully enough people are reading through the lines and elect a new President and party that can and will tackle these critical issues.

[miked]

We had a different party in power and *gasp* none of it was fixed. Shocking, I know! We can't even get that awesome party to fund our government, or even move a bill forward. Party of progress!!!!

[flere-imsaho]

That new party probably isn't the GOP, though, given that their focus is so singularly on "owning the libs" that they've forgotten how to, you know, keep the government running.

[cuervo72]

Outside of the families of servicemembers who died from the Afghan suicide bomb...do many, Republicans or otherwise, really care how the exit went? There certainly hasn't been much clamor to reengage there. The optics were bad, which can/was capitalized on.

I'd posit that most Republicans also don't give a flying fig about "inner city test scores." Their main concern is to get their white kids out of those integrated schools. Then they can go to shit. In fact, I'm sure they want them to go to shit. Less competition, and they can continue to say "look how these minorities are failing!" (It's really not just inner city, either. It's more just poor areas. I'm going to guess scores in poor rural Alabama aren't exactly stellar, either. I'm sure getting rid of the Dept. of Ed and lowering state taxes, while giving vouchers to white kids to go to not those schools is the solution to these problems though.)

Curious what these "foreign policy failures" are. Strenghtening NATO? Backing Ukraine against Russia? Improving relations with countries like Vietnam, strengthening Indo-Pacific ties?

[Flasch186]

I know a high up school administrator in Florida that said that the above is the plan regarding schools


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Atocep]

70% of inflation has been straight to cooperate profits. I'm sure the Trump tax plan has nothing to do with the increased greed.

The GOP also doesn't have an answer to inflation because it would mean hitting those same cooperate profits. It's the party of pointing out problems but not wanting solutions because it's easier to keep their base engaged when there are problems to blame on the other side.

[NobodyHere]

And Joe Biden and Democrats have done nothing about corporate profites.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Outside of the families of servicemembers who died from the Afghan suicide bomb...do many, Republicans or otherwise, really care how the exit went?

I mean, Trump doesn't even care about vets: Donald Trump made vile comments about disabled Army veteran who sang 'God Bless America': report

It boggles the mind that the "god bless the troops" crown can vote for this guy and his enablers (which are, let's remember, the entire Republican party).

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

And Joe Biden and Democrats have done nothing about corporate profites.

Biden's budget proposal (which will be killed by the GOP in the House*) raised corporate tax rates and increased the excise tax on stock buybacks. In addition, the Inflation Reduction Act will likely take a good cut out of pharma profits on the most expensive drugs.

*to be fair, they're killing their own budget proposals, too, and not funding the defense department.

[Edward64]

Nice. Another 20 miles of border wall.

I suspect the relocation of undocumented to other parts of the US has applied the pressure on Joe to do this.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/...wall-103738662

The Biden administration announced it waived 26 federal laws in South Texas to allow border wall construction on Wednesday, marking the administration’s first use of a sweeping executive power employed often during the Trump presidency.
:
The DHS decision on Wednesday contrasts the Biden administration's posturing when a proclamation to end the construction on Jan. 20, 2021, stated, “building a massive wall that spans the entire southern border is not a serious policy solution.”

Although no maps were provided in the announcement, CBP announced the project in June and began gathering public comments in August when it shared a map of the additional construction that can add up to 20 miles (32 kilometers) to the existing border barrier system in the area. Starr County Judge Eloy Vera said it will start south of the Falcon Dam and go past Salineño, Texas.

[Edward64]

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bide...y?id=103999466

The Biden administration and the American Civil Liberties Union have reached a proposed settlement agreement that, if approved, would provide benefits for thousands of migrant families separated under the Trump administration's controversial "zero tolerance" policy to deter illegal southern border crossings.

Good idea

The settlement would prohibit separations unless there are concerns regarding the wellness of the migrant child, national security issues, medical emergencies or in the case of criminal warrants.

You'd think this would have been obvious

The settlement would also provide continued support services for those who were separated from their families when Trump was president, including covering the cost of medical bills incurred during or because of the separations.

Good idea

The government will cover some housing costs for those who were impacted and will extend parole for those families who are not yet reunified, the official said.

Good idea

The ACLU said that under the settlement, more than 3,900 children and their families would be eligible for temporary relief from future deportation for up to three years, with a chance to renew. Members of those families would also be granted work authorizations.

IMO the situation was egregious enough where we should fast track them somehow to permanent residency (just like Afghanistan interpreters)


More to the story not mentioned by ABC above ...

Access Denied

The families also sought financial compensation from the U.S. government, but the Biden administration’s Justice Department abruptly walked away from those negotiations two years ago when President Joe Biden was asked if families would be receiving $450,000 each and he said it was “not going to happen.”

Individual families are still seeking damages in civil court, where the Biden administration has been fighting them.

Good to see lawyers getting involved. We are a lawsuit happy country. There should be some $ involved, I'm surprised ACLU caved in here.


I want to know the names of the leadership responsible for the day-to-day operations at the border sections with the separations. Regardless of the professional consequences (probably none), I want to know their names and think liberal MSM should be holding them accountable in the court of public opinion.

[Edward64]

Looks like the Israel-Ukraine-Taiwan bill will be pushed to Jan. And even after the Senate agrees, good chance it'll be another grind with the House.

I've read the GOP Senate wants more stringent Parole, Asylum requirements; funding for the border; and a place/camp to put the ones in limbo. But I've not actually seen an analysis of what GOP wants vs Dems willing to offer and places of compromise.

Basically, illegal immigration is a losing issue for Joe. Or at least how his policies are being implemented right now. Joe needs to do something to really turn this around and ultimately, he has to acquiesce to most of the GOP demands to help Ukraine ... it'll be one or the other.

Analysis: Trump and Biden are tied among immigrant voters | CNN Politics

Now, there isn’t polling – yet – to indicate whether or not voters like the particular words or phrases Trump has invoked in his anti-immigrant rhetoric. But what polls do show is that among voters overall, Trump is far more trusted than the current president on immigration and border security, and he is doing quite well among immigrant voters.

Take a look at the past two CNN/SSRS polls that asked about a potential Biden vs. Trump general election matchup.
:
What we find in an average of the past two CNN surveys is that neither Biden nor Trump is ahead: The two are tied at 48% .

When asked which party’s views on immigration were closer to their own, immigrant voters were only 1 point more likely to say the Democratic Party than the Republican Party. This is well within the margin of error.

In a November Marquette University Law School survey, 50% of registered voters said Trump would do better on border security and immigration. Just 27% of voters said Biden would. (A September poll found similarly.)
:
This is a big change from what we saw on a similar poll question in 2020. Back then, Biden (43%) and Trump (42%) were basically tied on the question of who would handle immigration and border security better.

Nearly 80% of voters want an increased effort presence at the southern border to stop illegal immigration, according to a September Marquette poll. This includes a majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents.

Even when it comes to something as controversial as building a wall along the US-Mexico border, we’ve seen a significant switch. The two most recent Fox News polls and the latest Quinnipiac University survey found for the first time that a majority of voters favored building Trump’s long-called-for wall along the US southern border.

On why Trump is doing better than expected with legal immigrants ...

That may be part of the reason why many voters – immigrants among them – are, at a minimum, willing to look past Trump’s rhetoric. They believe Trump is more likely than Biden to do what they prefer when it comes to immigration and the border.

The CNN article says below. I agree its not "top issue" but it's somewhat misleading. It is an "extremely important" issue for 44% of voters based on a CNN Nov 2022 article.

For one thing, immigration and border security is not their top issue. Over 40% cited economic concerns (including inflation) as the top issue facing the country. Only a little more than 10% named immigration and border security.

These numbers are generally in line with the population as a whole.

[Edward64]

I don't know what was "negotiated" - carrot, stick or likely both, but good result. This shows that Mexico can do something about it if they wanted to (just like in the Trump era).

My vote is give Mexico what they want, likely more cost effective and less political conflict.

US-Mexico border: Tensions rise as the number of migrant apprehensions drop significantly | CNN

The number of migrant encounters in Eagle Pass, Texas – very recently the epicenter of the migrant crisis – has dropped significantly, from thousands of apprehensions daily a few weeks ago to about 500 a day this week, city officials said.
:
Overall migrant encounters on the US southern border topped 10,000 per day in mid-December, then – following high-level talks between Mexico and the US in Mexico City – dropped to about 3,000 per day in January.

The Department of Homeland Security has attributed the drop to a few things:

- Enhanced enforcement actions by Mexico, including on trains and buses;

- Mexico moving migrants along the country’s northern border to the southern border;

- Mexico reinstating deportations of Venezuelans.

Mexico has confirmed devoting resources but hasn’t provided details.

[Edward64]

Reference from another thread for possible discussion

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - The 2024 Presidential Nomination Thread

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

A nice surprise. For all the naysayers about zero chance for an immigration bill compromise, I present the "Dignity Act". You may still be right, but I'm thinking (okay, hoping really) you are wrong.

Really don't know if this will be pushed now or after the next election (my guess is the latter), but good sign there has been bi-partisanship groundwork laid out for comprehensive reform/compromise now.

Congress Introduces Sweeping Immigration Reform Bill ‘DIGNIDAD Act’ to Address Systematic Challenges

I have not gone through the entire thread but this post actually addressed one of my issues with the conversation of immigration reform.

If this bill and the conversation in general is grounded in the principle highlighted above:

1. Doesn't that suggest that one side really only cares about increased enforcement and are completely against changes to the legal immigration system and a pathway for undocumented immigrants?

2. Doesn't that suggest the other side only cares about the changes to the legal immigration system and a pathway for undocumented immigrants and are completely against increased enforcement?

3.If the answer to both of those questions is yes, how does that trade work?

If the answer to both of those questions is no, why wasn't immigration reform completed decades ago?

It seems to me that as long as one side gets their increased enforcement and at the same time the other side gets their changes to the legal immigration system and a pathway for undocumented immigrants, that is a win-win for both sides and immigration reform is done with. As far as I can tell what we currently have is a willingness from both sides to not to get anything they want in order to prevent the other side from getting anything they want.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I have not gone through the entire thread but this post actually addressed one of my issues with the conversation of immigration reform.

If this bill and the conversation in general is grounded in the principle highlighted above:

A caveat to my responses below. I don't really know the status of the Dignity Act right now and how it may be superseded by the more recent Ukraine-Israel-Taiwan negotiations.

Googling some recent articles from Nov/Dec tells me it's still alive and apparently has some bipartisan support. But, there's a WaPo article behind a paywall that I cannot read. So, under the assumption it's still alive and there continues to be a degree of bipartisan support ...

1. Doesn't that suggest that one side really only cares about increased enforcement and are completely against changes to the legal immigration system and a pathway for undocumented immigrants?

Assume this is directed towards GOP.

I don't know why you would conclude this? My post #115 immediately after provides a high level summary of key points. If there is bipartisan support, then post #115 shows that GOP is not "completely against changes to the legal immigration system and pathway for undocumented immigrants".

Per my post #115

1) Dreamers are in ... they have pathway to legalization but unsure if that means citizenship
2) Approx 11M illegals are in ... meaning pathway to legalization but likely NOT citizenship

2. Doesn't that suggest the other side only cares about the changes to the legal immigration system and a pathway for undocumented immigrants and are completely against increased enforcement?

Assume this is directed toward Democrats.

Again per #115 summary of key points, I would not conclude this.

1) Additional funds to Border Security. Approx $35B + $10B
2) Mandatory E-Verify

3.If the answer to both of those questions is yes, how does that trade work?

N/A

If the answer to both of those questions is no, why wasn't immigration reform completed decades ago?

Because both sides are not willing to spend the political capital and take the political risk to make it a Top-3 priority.

Imagine in the first 2 years of Obama Admin, or Trump Admin, or Biden Admin (when each President also owned Congress) what would have happened if wanted to make this top priority. But they didn't, they spent their political capital on other stuff like Obamacare, on Tax Cuts & Wall, on Pandemic & Infrastructure Bill etc. Then when they paid attention to it, they tried to slip it into another big bill, or 2 months before election day or BS like that.

Bottom-line. I don't like everything in the Dignity Act, and I believe some things are missing. But I do like a lot of things in it. I think both parties should compromise and make it happen. Don't let perfection stand in the way of good enough.

[JPhillips]

There are enough GOPers who want to reduce or eliminate all non-Euro immigration so that nothing can happen. Trump says they are going to deport 10 mil folks, so that's what the GPO position is now. The Senate could pass a bill with a lot of needed changes, but the GOP House leadership has already said they won't even consider any bill from the Senate.

[Edward64]

Regarding eliminating all non-Euro immigration. Provide a source so I can confirm, otherwise I'll call it the Twitter & Tik-Tok syndrome.

And the 10M, let's call it what it is. Majority of GOP wants to remove the 10M illegals. Important to make the distinction between legal and illegal.

On the Senate bill, probably because the House passed their own Immigration "Secure the Border" bill back in May 2023 that the Senate hasn't considered at all. So yeah, both sides.

[miami_fan]

Sorry, when I quoted your post, I did not realize the part you quoted did not show up. This is what I was commenting on.

Like many such proposals, the bill is grounded in the principle of trading increased enforcement (primarily at the border) for changes to the legal immigration system and a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants.

My point is if both sides are completely interested in both increased enforcement and for changes to the legal immigration system and a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants, there is no political capital to be spent. There is no political risk. There is no actual trade. All you are doing is figuring out how to accomplish both. Given what you offered, I ask my questions more specifically

Do both sides of the immigration debate want the changes that allow the Dreamers and current undocumented workers to stay and have a path to legalization or not?

Do both sides of the immigration debate want the increased funding for Border Security and imposing mandatory E-verify or not?

Again if the answer is yes. Reform should take about a week and everyone has a nice trophy to present during the election season.

On the other hand, I can't imagine walking into a room filled with people who did not want the Dreamers or current undocumented workers to have a path to legalization and presenting them with the gift of increased funding for Border Security and mandatory E-verify? Same for walking into a room filled with who didn't want increased funding for those things.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

My point is if both sides are completely interested in both increased enforcement and for changes to the legal immigration system and a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants, there is no political capital to be spent. There is no political risk. There is no actual trade. All you are doing is figuring out how to accomplish both. Given what you offered, I ask my questions more specifically

Here's my sense of the situation and just going to use generalizations to illustrate. I don't claim the % are accurate.

The bipartisan support is not 100% bipartisan support. So, let's just say 20% of Dems wholeheartedly support Dignity Act and would vote yes as-is. Same for 20% of GOP. The remaining 60% is the political theatre where the political capital needs to be spent.

Do both sides of the immigration debate want the changes that allow the Dreamers and current undocumented workers to stay and have a path to legalization or not?

Do both sides of the immigration debate want the increased funding for Border Security and imposing mandatory E-verify or not?

The answer is some, not most ... at this point in time. So, using my illustrative nos. above, 40% are yes, 60% are no.

Again if the answer is yes. Reform should take about a week and everyone has a nice trophy to present during the election season.

N/A

On the other hand, I can't imagine walking into a room filled with people who did not want the Dreamers or current undocumented workers to have a path to legalization and presenting them with the gift of increased funding for Border Security and mandatory E-verify? Same for walking into a room filled with who didn't want increased funding for those things.

This is where the political capital, "compromise & horse trading" happens. It doesn't need to get the other 60% on board, it just needs to get another 11% on board.

You listed 4 factors. Dems want (1) legalization of Dreamers (2) legalization of guestimate 10.5M+ illegals. GOP wants (3) Border Security. Arguably, neither really wants (4) fool proof E-Verify. But also toss in (5) GOP want additional $35B + $10B for increased border security (6) Both want increased Guest Workers (7) both probably wants O-Visa, enhanced F-1 etc.

Maybe now, possibly toss in (8) aid to Israel and (9) aid to Ukraine. So that's a lot of cards to play with for the theoretical 11%.

[JPhillips]

That's all true in the Senate, but in the House Johnson and Scalise have said they won't even discuss a bill.

[Edward64]

Yup. Guess its tit-for-tat.

GOP House doesn't want to go with the Dem Senate version. Dem Senate didn't want to do with the GOP House version.

From Nov, 2023 ...

Walberg Cosponsors Bill to Help Secure the Border, Demands Senate Vote on H.R. 2 | Congressman Tim Walberg.

"This is a national security and humanitarian crisis and the Senate and President Biden simply cannot wait any longer to secure the border," said Rep. Walberg. "Each year President Biden has been in office, we've seen a new record for encounters, yet the Administration continues to ignore the problem. For months, the (Democratic) Senate has also refused to take up the Secure the Border Act, which passed the House in early May and is the strongest border bill to ever pass the House.

[JPhillips]

The difference is the Senate version is bipartisan and the House version is just GOP. The negotiations you claim to want are happening in the Senate.

We're in the same place we've been for twenty years. There's enough of a majority to pass an immigration bill with concessions by both sides, but the far-right won't let anything that shows promise come to the floor for a vote.