posted by ptown_trojans_1

I'm going by the last 15 years, going back to the failed Bush Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

Any discussion to reform would get blocked by Senate Republicans. Any moderate proposal by a republican, like Rubio or Portman, would get shot down by other Republicans in the Senate. Portman has said so much over the last year and expressed it was one of the reasons he is leaving. 

I don't know how far Ds would go on immigration reform. But, I do know Cruz, Cotton, and others are going to block nearly everything that Ds support for immigration. 

Last year, the Senate did increase the cap of merit based applications, which is great. So, there is a template, but dumb laws like the RAISE act is the current Republican platform.

I think some aspects of what you are calling for, along with beefing up immigration judges, application officials, and streamlining the process could get bipartisan support. But, I doubt we see it, because Republicans in the Senate prefer the status quo.

You know the truth to his question and statement (below) and thus why you avoid giving it a straight answer.

“ Let me ask you this, you really believe the Ds would be all for the “no welfare programs at all for 12 months” part? Come on, your leftist buddies would cry racism immediately. “

posted by like_that

You know the truth to his question and statement (below) and thus why you avoid giving it a straight answer.

“ Let me ask you this, you really believe the Ds would be all for the “no welfare programs at all for 12 months” part? Come on, your leftist buddies would cry racism immediately. “

In the House, the liberal Ds would raise hell, but would fall in line as they usually do. They views are insane and the minority, thus would fall in the face of actual reform. 

 But, in the Senate, if it did include adding more immigration judges, increasing DHS application officials, and streamlining the process, I think so. 

It's the give and take right? The give is a complete overall of the system and process, but the take is you add more judges and officials to process the backlog and new applications. 

Any agreement would also have to tackle DACA and the illegals here. 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

In the House, the liberal Ds would raise hell, but would fall in line as they usually do. They views are insane and the minority, thus would fall in the face of actual reform. 

 But, in the Senate, if it did include adding more immigration judges, increasing DHS application officials, and streamlining the process, I think so. 

It's the give and take right? The give is a complete overall of the system and process, but the take is you add more judges and officials to process the backlog and new applications. 

Any agreement would also have to tackle DACA and the illegals here. 

Give and take indeed.  So, you do agree that the gridlock on immigration is bipartisan?

posted by like_that

Give and take indeed.  So, you do agree that the gridlock on immigration is bipartisan?

I would say the Republicans in the Senate have done more to stop or prevent more efforts to reform than the Democrats. Again, looking back over the last 15 years. 

Each major effort failed because of lack of Republican support in the Senate. 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

I would say the Republicans in the Senate have done more to stop or prevent more efforts to reform than the Democrats. 

I don't think either side has any interest in making real progress on the issue.  The Dems could have done a lot more those first two years of Obama's term when they had a near supermajority.

The reality is it's a wedge issue, and both sides love to rant on that because they get to make emotional appeals, blame the other side, and offer no real solutions.  Same with guns, abortion and climate change/oil.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

I'm going by the last 15 years, going back to the failed Bush Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

Any discussion to reform would get blocked by Senate Republicans. Any moderate proposal by a republican, like Rubio or Portman, would get shot down by other Republicans in the Senate. Portman has said so much over the last year and expressed it was one of the reasons he is leaving. 

I don't know how far Ds would go on immigration reform. But, I do know Cruz, Cotton, and others are going to block nearly everything that Ds support for immigration. 

Last year, the Senate did increase the cap of merit based applications, which is great. So, there is a template, but dumb laws like the RAISE act is the current Republican platform.

I think some aspects of what you are calling for, along with beefing up immigration judges, application officials, and streamlining the process could get bipartisan support. But, I doubt we see it, because Republicans in the Senate prefer the status quo.

So your stated stance is that Rs are against legal immigration based on merit (which is what I said) and Ds are for it while not just letting everyone in?

I just want to make sure what you are arguing before laughing at the statement.

I have yet to hear an R come out against anything close to a merit based immigration system and legal immigration. They are against complete amnesty for illegals and even the most conservative are against those currently here getting to jump to the front of the “line” which usually is the first step in the D’s plan.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

In the House, the liberal Ds would raise hell, but would fall in line as they usually do. They views are insane and the minority, thus would fall in the face of actual reform. 

 But, in the Senate, if it did include adding more immigration judges, increasing DHS application officials, and streamlining the process, I think so. 

It's the give and take right? The give is a complete overall of the system and process, but the take is you add more judges and officials to process the backlog and new applications. 

Any agreement would also have to tackle DACA and the illegals here. 

You do not live in reality, I am now convinced. Not a chance in Hell the Ds would get behind “no welfare at all for a year” no matter what the deal is.

I hope you are joking  because if not your “middle of the road” monicker is failing again.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

I would say the Republicans in the Senate have done more to stop or prevent more efforts to reform than the Democrats. Again, looking back over the last 15 years. 

Each major effort failed because of lack of Republican support in the Senate. 

Even if what you said was close to true it’s due to the Ds lack of budging at all on closing the border. You can’t deal with the illegal immigrants that are currently hear properly until you halt the flow of illegals drastically first.

The Ds have always required forms of amnesty FIRST before willing to talk about shutting down illegal immigration.

The fact that you put the blame solely on one side shows again you are no where near “middle of the road”

posted by gut

I don't think either side has any interest in making real progress on the issue.  The Dems could have done a lot more those first two years of Obama's term when they had a near supermajority.

The reality is it's a wedge issue, and both sides love to rant on that because they get to make emotional appeals, blame the other side, and offer no real solutions.  Same with guns, abortion and climate change/oil.

Yes

posted by jmog

To be fair, when you come here, specifically illegally, you are almost twice as likely to be on welfare than if you are a citizen.

About 35% of citizens use some form of welfare program while 63% of non-citizens do.  I don't believe those here on H1 work visas are taking that percentage up so it has to be those coming here by other means.

The "old" way of immigration for not only the US but Canada also (friend of mine who immigrated from Russia after the fall of the USSR to Canada spelled this out for me) was that you had to prove you could provide for yourself and you would be ineligible for ANY social welfare programs for 12 months after you arrived in Canada. 

If that was still the case, accept all/most workers that want to come here and provide for themselves yet deter those coming here for the safety net.

So no welfare, no food stamps, no Section 8 housing, etc for 12 months after you arrive and you have to prove before you arrive that you have the ability to provide for yourself.

My friend immigrated in the 80s when communism fell and that's how it was then, even for "liberal" Canada, why can't we have something similar. Literally accept most everyone that can prove they have a skill and can provide for themselves with the understanding they can not rely on welfare for a year.

Illegal immigrants can get welfare?

posted by geeblock

Illegal immigrants can get welfare?

If they can vote I wouldn't see this being too difficult for them to accomplish.

Nothing more on the nose than gaslighting us over the price of gas!

posted by geeblock

Illegal immigrants can get welfare?

Depends on the state but absolutely they do in many states. 

Also notice I said welfare programs which is all inclusive safety net programs not just specifically welfare.

Hope that helps.

posted by jmog

Depends on the state but absolutely they do in many states. 

Also notice I said welfare programs which is all inclusive safety net programs not just specifically welfare.

Hope that helps.

what states?

posted by jmog

Also notice I said welfare programs which is all inclusive safety net programs not just specifically welfare.

I was pretty shocked by the numbers, and did some drilling down.  They do pay taxes (not sure exactly how, without a SSN), so I don't see an issue with getting Social Security or EITC.  I don't consider progressive tax features to really be "welfare".

But they are about 50% more likely to receive food and health insurance, which is clearly welfare in the truest sense of the word.

Shocking numbers no matter how you slice it.

Harris in Poland laughing at the presser to cover up her complete lack of knowledge and leadership.  What a worldwide embarrassment.

posted by gut

I was pretty shocked by the numbers, and did some drilling down.  They do pay taxes (not sure exactly how, without a SSN), so I don't see an issue with getting Social Security or EITC.  I don't consider progressive tax features to really be "welfare".

But they are about 50% more likely to receive food and health insurance, which is clearly welfare in the truest sense of the word.

Shocking numbers no matter how you slice it.

I dont see anywhere where illegal immigrants on any type of large scale get benefits except emergency medical care. I do see where their dependent children can receive benefits in some states.

posted by geeblock

I dont see anywhere where illegal immigrants on any type of large scale get benefits

Well, of course you're not going to "see" it if you don't even bother to spend 5 seconds searching.

https://cis.org/Report/63-NonCitizen-Households-Access-Welfare-Programs

https://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/02/report-more-than-half-of-immigrants-on-welfare.html

posted by gut

Well, of course you're not going to "see" it if you don't even bother to spend 5 seconds searching.

https://cis.org/Report/63-NonCitizen-Households-Access-Welfare-Programs

https://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/02/report-more-than-half-of-immigrants-on-welfare.html

Non-citiczens and illegal immigrants are two different groups but thanks

One is a sub-set of the other.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/europes-green-energy-policies-strengthened-putin-michael-shellenberger-says

Bingo

posted by QuakerOats

One is a sub-set of the other.

well i was referencing illegal immigrants

posted by geeblock

I dont see anywhere where illegal immigrants on any type of large scale get benefits except emergency medical care. I do see where their dependent children can receive benefits in some states.

Google is your friend.

Hope that helps.

posted by geeblock

Non-citiczens and illegal immigrants are two different groups but thanks

Hope you aren’t believing that those here on H1 work visas and student visas, both of which have to show proof of ability to financially support themselves (or foreign family for student visas)….hope you aren’t insinuating that they are making up the majority of these “non-citizen” numbers using welfare programs.

Because that would be laughable.

posted by jmog

Hope you aren’t believing that those here on H1 work visas and student visas, both of which have to show proof of ability to financially support themselves (or foreign family for student visas)….hope you aren’t insinuating that they are making up the majority of these “non-citizen” numbers using welfare programs.

Because that would be laughable.

Well illegal immigrants make up like what 3% of the population and so if 60% based on your numbers  find a way to get welfare with no SSN who gives a fuck. I just don’t see that it would be that easy to get welfare without a SSN. Like I said maybe it’s counting the children who were born here who can get benefits but idk