Trump's Immigration Reform

[Edward64]

(Starting a dedicated thread to discuss Biden's Immigration bill. Some immigration discussion was discussed in the regular Biden thread but some folks didn't want to see it there. Feel free to ignore this thread and not participate)

Recent articles are reporting on the proposed Immigration bill. I've cobbled together info from 3 articles. There doesn't seem to be an all-comprehensive list so far from MSM (not sure why) because I was reading articles and finding bits-and-pieces left out from other articles.

Articles are reporting no guarantees it'll pass as is (no surprise) but hoping for some good negotiations, compromise, and an opportunity to get some bi-partisanship as this is not near as pressing as the stimulus bill & coronavirus.

From USAToday

Biden immigration plan: What we know about the bill, chance of passage

1. The legislation introduced Thursday includes a provision that would create a pathway to citizenship for the country's 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Eligible people would be placed under temporary status for five years and then would undergo three more years of processing to get citizenship.

2. The plan also incorporates parts of other recent reform packages in Congress. Large parts of the Reuniting Families Act, sponsored by Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., have been adopted into the bill.

Those provisions would speed up the process by which family members of U.S. residents can join their relatives, a procedure which can currently take up to 2 years or more for people in many countries.

3. The bill has provisions to increase border security enforcement by cracking down on drug smugglers and other illegal transnational networks. New technology would be implemented to police the border as well.

The bill also includes higher penalties for employers who use undocumented laborers in the United States and increases funding for immigration courts.

4. The proposal would raise the number of diversity visas, which are visas awarded at random to countries that don't otherwise send many immigrants to the U.S. The number granted annually is currently 55,000; the proposed plan would raise that to 80,000.

5. The proposed bill would eliminate so-called “3- and 10-year bars" on people who are deported from the United States for unlawful presence. Currently, those who are in the country illegally for 180 days or less are barred for three years from returning. Those who are unlawfully in the U.S. for more than one year are barred for 10 years.

6. The proposal seeks to address the root causes of migration into the United States from Mexico and Central American countries. The bill would create a $4 billion investment plan that policymakers hope would create safer migration pathways and stop many from fleeing their home countries.

Additional from ABC News

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/demo...ry?id=75960479

7. It tries to prevent people from taking the dangerous journey north by setting up refugee processing centers in Central America. The bill also expands transnational gang task forces in the region.

8. The bill would remove the word "alien" in the immigration code and replace it with "noncitizen." This move has been applauded by immigrant advocates who see the use of the word as derogatory and dehumanizing.

Additional from CNN

White House announces sweeping immigration bill | CNN Politics

9. The bill provides funding for more immigration judges and puts an emphasis on access to counsel. It authorizes funding for counsel for children and vulnerable individuals, and eliminates the one-year limit for filing an asylum case.

10. The legislation proposes creating a commission composed of employers, labor unions and civil rights advocates to make recommendations on improving worker verification, according to an administration official. The measure would also increase protections for immigrants who come forward to report labor violations and increase penalties for employers who knowingly hire undocumented workers.

[Edward64]

My initial thought is disappointment. There are 2 things I think should be in the bill.

More focus, increase of temporary/guest worker programs. IMO this is like a key driver for success.

More focus, increase of higher skilled immigrants.

[GrantDawg]

I like his plan. Has everything I'd like to see.

[CrimsonFox]

why is there a need for a new thread. booooooooooooo

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

why is there a need for a new thread. booooooooooooo

Just trying to be sensitive to others that don't care to participate in the conversation. See Biden thread, start with #1073 on pg 22 and read to pg 23.

[NobodyHere]

Yes, let's spend more money that we don't have.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Yes, let's spend more money that we don't have.

I was not able to find how much the propose changes would cost. The proposed assistance to countries south of the border is $4B but obviously total package would cost more in the near term.

Arguably, more immigration will help country grow GDP in the long term but don't know if there will be hard metrics calculated on that.

$1.9T for stimulus. Heard the $50K student debt cancellation is about $1.7T (if this is the true cost, I'm with Joe and his $10K vs $50K). Pure guess but this bill won't cost more than $50B so a drop in the proverbial bucket for a supposed strategic long-term benefit.

But as mentioned, more guest workers and more skilled immigrants are needed.

[Edward64]

Trump had this freeze last Apr and a good move overall. Don't think the timing to lift it now is optimal but can understand the optics and pressure for Biden to do so. A better time is after we get the pandemic under control but assume this freeze lift doesn't mean that there will be a immediate flood but some "transition" time of 2-3+ months before resources actually get here (e.g. after most everyone here had their inoculations).

Biden Reopens Green Card, Work Visa System, Dumping Trump COVID Ban : NPR

President Biden on Wednesday revoked a freeze that his predecessor had put on many types of visas due to the COVID-19 pandemic, saying the order did not advance U.S. interests and hurt industries and individuals alike.

"It harms the United States, including by preventing certain family members of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents from joining their families here," Biden said in a proclamation revoking the measure.

Former President Donald Trump had frozen "green cards" for new immigrants, and halted temporary work visas for skilled workers, managers and au pairs in the H-1B, H-4, H-2B, L-1 and J categories, to protect jobs. He argued that the dramatic clamp down on legal immigration was vital to safeguarding the U.S. labor market during pandemic.

But on Wednesday Biden said the earlier policy has prevented qualified and eligible non-U.S. residents from entering the country, "resulting, in some cases, in the delay and possible forfeiture of their opportunity ... and to realize their dreams in the United States."

[Edward64]

Good luck to Biden on executing his plan to properly, humanely etc. to process the asylum seekers. My gut tells me this volume will continue/increase and is not sustainable.

The article talks about unaccompanied children. I don't know if this is new or if there has always been a lot of unaccompanied children. Another challenge that Biden admin will have to face.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/26/polit...der/index.html

The Biden administration is planning to open another facility in south Texas to expand processing capacity for children and families arriving at the US-Mexico border, a Department of Homeland Security official confirmed to CNN.

It's the latest move by the administration to address the growing number of migrant families and unaccompanied children at the US southern border. Earlier this month, US Customs and Border Protection also announced the opening of a "soft-sided" structure in Donna, Texas, to help with intake.
In January, more than 5,800 unaccompanied children and nearly 7,500 families were taken into custody by Customs and Border Protection at the US-Mexico border, according to the agency's most recent monthly data. And numbers are expected to continue to rise.

On Thursday, Brian Hastings, the Border Patrol sector chief in Rio Grande Valley, tweeted about the volume of migrants approaching the border. "In less than a 24 hour period, this area alone saw more than 500 illegal entries," he said in a tweet, adding that the majority were families and accompanied children.

Border officials are taking more than 300 unaccompanied children into custody daily at the border on average, according to another Homeland Security official.

[Mota]

We had something similar to that happen in Canada a few years back. Our Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made a humanitarian statement about refugees,
"To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength"
Almost immediately, thousands of refugees started to stream in illegally through NY state into Quebec. It has taken years to control it since then.
People will find a loophole and try to exploit it.

[Edward64]

(Brought from the Biden thread as some have asked to keep that free of immigration discussion. BTW - let it be shown that I did not start the immigration tangent in the recent discussion!)

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - The Biden Presidency - 2020

Originally Posted by Edward64

Googled on stats. There are about 1.1M foreign students which is about 6% of those in higher ed. Agree that in the short term, this won't make a dent in tax base but increasing the # and keeping them in the US (e.g. fast track to green card & citizenship) will definitely help in the long term.

And ... add in other foreigners that already have their degrees (or rich), give them fast track (assuming security concerns are taken care of) and we'll be that much better.

I can understand white Americans that are concerned about losing the American way, identity etc. whatever that means, but we can't discount those feelings. A possible compromise IMO is to continue the ratio, not to suddenly increase minority legal immigration disproportionately.

Bottom line. Per an older article, of those that want to immigrate, the vast, vast majority want to immigrate to the US (sorry Europe & Nordics). This is what I would consider a "strategic competitive advantage" and it's stupid for us to not leverage this somehow.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

A lot of "illegal" people who are living here now would love nothing more than the chance to leave for half the year and just come back to help goose our economy.

I really don't understand why Biden's immigration bill did not include increased guest workers, it just makes so much sense to me and I figure it'll have bipartisanship support. I was not able to find a reason why but have to believe there is one, so if you've read something please link it.

Biden’s Bill Won’t Solve Future Illegal Immigration Without Guest Workers | Cato Institute

President Biden endorsed the U.S. Citizenship Act last week that would create a path to citizenship for most noncriminal illegal immigrants in the United States. Republicans were quick to criticize the bill’s lack of money for border security. But more funds for the border bureaucracy won’t stop illegal immigration. Sadly, however, the better solution—more guest workers—also didn’t make the cut.

The failure to include guest workers violates a campaign promise by Biden. His immigration platform states that his proposed legislation would “expand opportunities for individuals seeking temporary worker visas or another form of legal status for which they may qualify to be able to come to the U.S.” Yet the U.S. Citizenship Act doesn’t address this issue at all.

[ISiddiqui]

Cause he has to come to a compromise with labor unions

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...1b-visa-uproar

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Quote:

What a load of horse shit, the fuck we can't.

These are people who only want white men in power. They want to hold back anyone who is a different color, race, religion, or who doesn't have the same values as them. They disguise it as losing the "American Way" but all they are doing is putting lipstick on a pig.

The last thing we should do is cater to the feelings of white nationalists.

The context to my statement is me wanting us to greatly increase/prioritize legal immigration for highly educated foreigners - white, black, LATAM brown, Asian brown & yellow. Knowing there will be a great deal of push back, a potential compromise is to keep ratios the same.

You say white nationalists, I say if you think it's only white nationalists that would push back, you are wrong. Regular nationalists, large minority of minorities etc.

FWIW, no exact opinion poll I can find so take below graphic as evidence there are approx 25-30% of blacks/hispanics that would not welcome greatly increased legal immigration.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Cause he has to come to a compromise with labor unions

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

That article talks about H-1b which is geared towards the highly skilled workers (e.g. Indian tech workers). It does reference "guest worker" related to H-1b but I was actually using "guest worker" for the seasonal workers doing the jobs Americans don't want to do.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The fear that open borders means cultural destruction is overblown/flat-out-incorrect.

I lean towards disagreeing with this statement but not sure I have proper context.

I guess it depends on the definition of (1) "destruction" but let's call it a very significant change of culture vs. near 100% eliminated and (2) "open borders" which I interpret could mean voluntary or involuntary.

If your definition of destruction is near 100% elimination, then I agree with you as that probably won't happen. If you define open borders in terms of voluntary, I don't know of an example ... because countries do not let that happen or get that far.

There are plenty of other countries today that worry about this. It's not just a US white nationalist concern, there are plenty of Japanese/Chinese yellow nationalists; Israeli brown (?) nationalists etc.

Take this argument into religion vs "race". Does your statement hold true if we use religion?

[GrantDawg]

There could be a valid argument made that the complete destruction of our culture would not be a bad thing.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

There could be a valid argument made that the complete destruction of our culture would not be a bad thing.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Lots of good, lots of bad. Methinks the good is more than the bad. Especially when compared to majority of other countries in the world.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Mota

We had something similar to that happen in Canada a few years back. Our Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made a humanitarian statement about refugees,
"To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength"
Almost immediately, thousands of refugees started to stream in illegally through NY state into Quebec. It has taken years to control it since then.
People will find a loophole and try to exploit it.

I think we can now conclude it's a "strategy" to send kids alone across the border.

I wonder how many of the Trump kids separated from parents, are still separated by parent's choice? I really don't know but suspect "some" are by choice.

Biden will have to do something to stop/discourage this, it's not politically sustainable.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/10/polit...ren/index.html

Aides who traveled to the southern border at the behest of President Joe Biden have described to him a troubling surge of migrant children the administration is now racing to house as the President's more humane approach to immigration faces a critical early test.
:
:
But that strategy is already being stressed by the hundreds of unaccompanied children arriving each day at the US southern border, overwhelming border facilities and raising alarm among officials scrambling to accommodate them.
:
:
The sudden spike in children is being driven by the devastation left behind by two major hurricanes last year, the toll of the pandemic, and a perceived relaxation of enforcement. Under the Trump administration, border officials had also been turning away migrants, including children, after putting in place a public health order related to the coronavirus pandemic. While the Biden administration is still leaning on that policy, the administration has taken the position it will allow children arriving on their own into the US, resulting in more kids in US custody.

[BYU 14]

These fuckers just openly embrace their hypocrisy, suddenly they care about conditions at the detention centers after remaining silent for 4 years, as of course Dems remain silent now.

GOP lawmakers slam Biden after visit to migrant detention center at border

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

These fuckers just openly embrace their hypocrisy, suddenly they care about conditions at the detention centers after remaining silent for 4 years, as of course Dems remain silent now.

GOP lawmakers slam Biden after visit to migrant detention center at border

Agree.

I will say that if Biden doesn't somehow resolve the child-without-parents strategy, this will blow up eventually because it ain't gonna stop without him doing something.

I don't know what his best move is here.

[Edward64]

I think this is a politically dangerous assignment but kudos to Kamala. I assume she had an option to decline and was not voluntold.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/24/polit...ica/index.html

President Joe Biden is tasking Vice President Kamala Harris with overseeing efforts with Central American countries to stem the flow of migrants to the US southern border, the first major issue Biden has assigned directly to his No. 2.
:
The task mimics Biden's own efforts in 2014 and 2015, when he was asked by then-President Barack Obama to lead diplomatic efforts in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador after a surge of unaccompanied minors from those countries began arriving in the US.

Migrants are again arriving at the border at increased levels, causing a scramble by the administration to accommodate them and a political problem for the White House.

"Thank you, Mr. President, for having the confidence in me. There is no question that this is a challenging situation," Harris said on Wednesday. "While we are clear that people should not come to the border now, we also understand that we will enforce the law and that we also -- because we can chew gum and walk at the same time -- must address the root causes that cause people to make the trek, as the President has described, to come here."

[Edward64]

No doubt Cruz is a hypocritical ass but there is an element of truth here.

I'm willing to give Joe/Kamala another 3 months, they've had bigger problems to worry about and the kids-without-parents strategy caught them by surprise. But we are winning against the pandemic, economy seems to be stabilizing/recovering etc.

In the meantime ... crickets.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ted...-mexico-border

Senator Ted Cruz, R-Texas, ripped the Biden administration following a visit to the border with 17 other U.S. Senators Friday, telling Fox Business host Elizabeth MacDonald on "The Evening Edit" that the conditions in what he called the "Biden cages" of young migrants in Texas are "inhumane" and "unconscionable."

[Edward64]

Don't know if she left voluntarily or pushed out, but I'm all for a new border czar who (hopefully) will be more effective. TBF to Jacobson, I do think we need leadership at Biden/Harris level to make sure things get executed.

Biden's border czar to depart amid surge of migrants - POLITICO

The White House said Roberta Jacobson, a former ambassador to Mexico who had recently visited the country, had always expected to leave after Biden’s first 100 days. Some immigration advocates who work closely with the White House knew Jacobson was expected to leave after a few months but were surprised by the Friday afternoon announcement, which comes several weeks before the 100 days ends.
:
The news of Jacobson's departure comes a day after the administration announced that it saw a sharp increase in migrants attempting to cross the border in March, including a record number of unaccompanied children taken into custody.

More than 18,800 unaccompanied children crossed the border in March, a record-breaking figure; the previous high was more than 11,000 children in May 2019. The March numbers represent an almost 100 percent increase from February, when more than 9,400 minors were taken into custody.

In early March, Jacobson appeared at a White House briefing to discourage migrants from traveling to the United States. But she misspoke when speaking Spanish, saying the border was open when she meant to say it was closed.

[Edward64]

Joe, I don't know why this is so hard. Easily predictable reaction, stupid and needless mistake.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/16/polit...cap/index.html

The White House said Friday President Joe Biden will set a new, increased refugee cap next month after facing a barrage of criticism when officials confirmed to CNN and other outlets that it would remain at the historically low level set by former President Donald Trump.

Only hours earlier, the administration announced Biden would sign an emergency determination that keeps this fiscal year's refugee cap of 15,000, but not raise the refugee cap as he had committed to doing, marking a significant reversal from his administration's proposal earlier this year to lift the cap to 62,500. The move faced immediate blowback from refugee groups and lawmakers frustrated by the sudden shift.

Instead, the emergency declaration returned to regional allocations, in effect casting a wider net of who can arrive to the US under the refugee ceiling currently in place. The administration left the door open for raising the ceiling some if the 15,000 is met before the end of September. Just last week, White House press secretary Jen Psaki had said Biden remained committed to raising the refugee cap to 62,500.

This is reasonable.

Claiming the President's directive on refugee allocations "has been the subject of some confusion," Psaki said Friday afternoon that Biden will "set a final, increased refugee cap for the remainder of this fiscal year by May 15."

Probably the only mea culpa they could have given "subject of some confusion".

"Given the decimated refugee admissions program we inherited, and burdens on the Office of Refugee Resettlement, his initial goal of 62,500 seems unlikely," she added.

Stupid excuse.

[Edward64]

As a part of the $3.5T (and guess add the $1.2T infrastructure) bill, there are few details on immigration reform.

The lack of details implies this is really not a priority for Biden (also evidenced also by the lack of Kamala in the news). Illegal immigration aside, let's do the low hanging fruit like increase guest workers, address H-1 abuses, etc.

Democrats Seek to Legalize Undocumented Immigrants via Massive Budget Proposal

Senate Democrats unveiled an initial framework for a proposed federal budget resolution for the 2022 fiscal year, which begins in October. The framework includes two items pertaining to immigration — "lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants" and "investments in smart and effective border security measures."

No further details were provided, but Democrats have long championed providing legal status to a large proportion of the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants in America — a first step toward potential U.S. citizenship.
:
To get around the roadblock, Sanders is attaching immigration proposals to a massive $3.5 trillion spending blueprint Democrats are championing.

[Edward64]

re: illegal immigration

Reporting that we are deporting a bunch of Haitians from the border (how in the world did they get to Mexico, looking at a map that's a looong haul).

Illegal immigration "encounters" have increased significantly to a 2 decade high. Biden is "mulling" below which seems to be a reasonable compromise. Essentially (I think), keep illegals in Mexico while we are processing their applications.

Per an Axios report, a third of illegal children (4,900) released to sponsor can't be accounted for. Investigations now if they were released to labor traffickers.

Still a cluster. It has a more humanitarian face to it, more sympathies expressed etc. but don't see how much of anything has been done to help illegal immigration. I assume the default is the Bernie moonshot to give illegals path to citizenship as part of the $3.5T bill but don't think that addresses the ones still coming.

Biden mulls ‘lite’ version of Trump’s ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy - POLITICO

... new proposal — what some have dubbed “Remain in Mexico lite” — would require a small number of asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their cases to be processed but give them better living conditions and access to attorneys, according to three people familiar with the discussions
:
The administration is starting talks with Mexico in a bid to strike a balance between abiding by a federal court order and making good on the president’s campaign promises. A federal judge ruled last month that President Joe Biden’s attempt to end the program — a pledge he made on the campaign trail — violated the law.

The possibility of resuming Migrant Protection Protocols or MPP — one of former President Donald Trump’s most contentious immigration policies — even while trying to soften it, has angered advocates who expected Biden to offer a more welcoming system for migrants.

Administration officials are considering whether to limit MPP to a small population — though it’s unclear who would be in the group — and to offer better living conditions in Mexico and access to attorneys.

But advocates are lobbying Mexico not to allow the U.S. to restart the program. “As a sovereign nation, Mexico has the right to reject the reinstatement of [the Migrant Protection Protocols] program or any future iteration of this policy that aims to externalize the U.S. border into Mexican territory,” according to a letter sent to President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador by dozens of advocacy organizations.

[Edward64]

Scratch Immigration Bill tied to the $3.5T.

If this forces Biden & team to focus more on immigration reform, I'm all for it. But fair chance it'll die on the vine.

The parliamentarian underscored the power of the chamber's rules to clip Democratic ambitions on Sunday night, ruling against the majority party's bid to include immigration reform in its social spending bill. That isn't the only call Democrats are anxious about getting: They'll likely also need parliamentarian approval to include provisions on labor, clean energy and drug pricing in their party-line bill. The Senate Budget Committee declined to comment about their strategy for winning those go-aheads.

[JPhillips]

There is literally not any plan, even one written by the Heritage Institute, that could get 10 GOP votes.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

There is literally not any plan, even one written by the Heritage Institute, that could get 10 GOP votes.

Oh I'm sure there is. But it would be probably at least -10 Dem votes. Proposing giving approx. 11M+ illegals pathway to citizenship will not get a lot of GOP support.

But I'm thinking increasing guest workers will. There was an article a while ago that said let's do the smaller, incremental things vs big holistic reform. That may be where we need to go.

[RainMaker]

[Edward64]

I'm all for securing the borders but this does seem too much.

Call for backup, get off the horses, protect yourself if you have to (lots of weapons) and secure & sit them down. If they run, then yeah gallop and chase them down.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Oh I'm sure there is. But it would be probably at least -10 Dem votes. Proposing giving approx. 11M+ illegals pathway to citizenship will not get a lot of GOP support.

But I'm thinking increasing guest workers will. There was an article a while ago that said let's do the smaller, incremental things vs big holistic reform. That may be where we need to go.

Nope. The GOP has made it clear they won't give Biden any wins. Biden could propose a plan by Tom Tancredo and the GOP would vote against it.

Just look at the debt limit. There was bipartisan support for it each time it was raised under Trump, but now the GOP won't give a single vote for it. Anything that possibly helps Biden is off the table for the GOP.

[Edward64]

Some GOP gave Biden a win on the $1.2T infrastructure. He probably could have signed that into law if it wasn't stuck to the $3T larger bill if (I think) more radical progressives hadn't forced his hand.

There's a middle ground somewhere without going to the extremes. Maybe a 2nd term priority if Biden and Dems do well.

[JPhillips]

The GOP saw the bipartisan bill as a way to kill the reconciliation bill. They'll be perfectly happy if neither pass.

[RainMaker]

Their strategy is sound. They know Democrats are too cowardly to do anything when in power without their support and would likely prefer to not be in power. So they play this game, watch the public get mad, and then win the next election.

[RainMaker]

Also Sinema sure has destroyed her career in just a few short months.

[Brian Swartz]

No matter what reforms are made in other areas, as long as voters don't punish obstructionism it will always be a valid strategy.

Having said that, Edward64 is right also. Even assuming Republicans agreed on the infrastructure bill to kill the reconciliation one, that path was still there to get the bill enacted and get *something*. It becomes much more difficult to paint them as obstructionists when they can get just say 'look, we tried this and they didn't go through with it, we attempted to be reasonable and this is what happened', etc.

[RainMaker]

They're not obstructionists since they have no power. Dems have control of every branch right now.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Also Sinema sure has destroyed her career in just a few short months.

She'll have to console herself with a multi-million dollar lobbying job.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

They're not obstructionists since they have no power. Dems have control of every branch right now.

You make it sound like the Dems are a unified group.

[Brian Swartz]

That's where I am as well. It doesn't do a lot of good - some, but not a lot - to control the Senate when it's split down the middle and some of that support is centrist. Ditto with the narrow margin in the House. That doesn't mean 'Democrats have the power to do what they want'. As has been said by smarter people than me, politics is the art of the possible - what it means is that Democrats can make small, incremental moves in the direction they want, only moves that don't overly upset centrists. If they're not willing to do that, they'll get nothing other than preventing Republicans from implementing any of their agenda.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Having said that, Edward64 is right also. Even assuming Republicans agreed on the infrastructure bill to kill the reconciliation one, that path was still there to get the bill enacted and get *something*. It becomes much more difficult to paint them as obstructionists when they can get just say 'look, we tried this and they didn't go through with it, we attempted to be reasonable and this is what happened', etc.

This is the way.

Without the $3.5T, good chance the $1.2T infrastructure would pass. The inner fighting between the Dems and the insistence it goes hand in hand (when Biden earlier said it did not need to) has put us in this situation.

A breakaway GOP group gave Biden an opportunity. He decided to roll the dice. Quote from late June after the $1.2T had bipartisanship support.

President Joe Biden said Saturday he never intended to portray the idea he would veto a bipartisan infrastructure plan. He said Thursday while making the announcement of a bipartisan agreement, he wouldn't sign the infrastructure deal if his American Families Plan was not part of the package.

"I indicated that I would refuse to sign the infrastructure bill if it was sent to me without my Families Plan and other priorities, including clean energy," the president said. "That statement understandably upset some Republicans, who do not see the two plans as linked; they are hoping to defeat my Families Plan—and do not want their support for the infrastructure plan to be seen as aiding passage of the Families Plan.

[JPhillips]

The 1.2 won't and never would have passed without a reconciliation bill. Saying otherwise is arguing that the bulk of Dems should have been happy with a centrist/GOP bill. That wasn't ever going to work.

[Brian Swartz]

What that tells me is a lot of Dems are unrealistic; in a Congress that's almost literally as equally divided as it is possible to get, centrists bills are the only option. It's not about them being 'happy', it's about accepting political reality.

If you don't negotiate on the infrastructure bill first, you at least don't hand the opposition ammunition for no good reason.

[JPhillips]

The bipartisan group is much smaller than the number of Dems supporting the reconciliation bill.

The bipartisan bill and the reconciliation bill were always a package deal. The centrists got what they wanted in the bipartisan deal and the rest of the Dems(which is the bulk of the party) got what they wanted in the reconciliation bill. The bulk of Dems would never agree to the bipartisan bill without the reconciliation and the centrists wouldn't agree to the reconciliation without the bipartisan bill.

Now the centrists want to have only their bill and that's a certain path to passing nothing. I still think both bills will pass, again, maybe with a smaller topline number, but the chance that neither do is getting higher. I don't see any way that the bipartisan bill passes and reconciliation doesn't.

[Edward64]

Not really sure what Biden's plan is. Long term may work if Kamala is really trying to address the root causes. Short term, not so much.

I thought Biden was continuing to cajole/bribe/threaten Mexico to better patrol the border to prevent the uptick in the US ... but apparently not.

The U.S. Border Patrol reported nearly 200,000 encounters with migrants along the U.S.-Mexico border in July, the highest monthly total in more than two decades.

The number of monthly encounters had fallen to 16,182 in April 2020, shortly after the coronavirus outbreak forced the closure of the southwestern border and slowed migration across much of the world. But migrant encounters have climbed sharply since then, reaching 199,777 in July, according to the latest data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the federal agency that encompasses the Border Patrol.

The July figure is the highest monthly total since March 2000 and far surpasses the peak during the last major wave of migration at the U.S.-Mexico border, which occurred in May 2019.

[RainMaker]

I would say the best long term solution there is to stop fucking with those countries and making them considerably worse places to live over access to a handful of cheap resources.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

You make it sound like the Dems are a unified group.

That's sort of the problem. And it's not about progressives vs moderates.

The prescription drug plan is massively popular among both parties. There is no downside to supporting it and cutting the costs of prescription drugs while saving taxpayer money. Heck, Trump even ran on it till the Pharma execs bought him lunch.

So people like Sinema aren't taking a "moderate" stance. They were just bribed by an industry that is getting special treatment from the government at the expense of every American.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Reporting that we are deporting a bunch of Haitians from the border (how in the world did they get to Mexico, looking at a map that's a looong haul).

The answer

But how did these Haitian migrants make their way to Texas instead of entering from Florida — a state that's closer to the Caribbean nation?

Many of those migrants, experts say, were likely already in Central America, as powerful natural disasters and an often-dysfunctional government prompted a steady flow of out-migration for more than a decade.

But now, with economic opportunities drying up in Latin America as the pandemic continues, Haitian migrants are seeking asylum in the U.S.