Printable View
ok so you don't understand how the border works. That's fine, just stop talking out your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by XU_Lou
you still don't understand the 5k a day number. It is encounters, not crossings. You have a very serious reading comprehension problem. First, a few days ago you link to an article all mad about the potential bill which turned out to be something from 4 years ago, and now this.
Next
Face it. This is a republican bill proposed by Republicans. Should end years of bitching but the,Orange man needs it be an issue.
From the Center for Immigration Studies:
Senate negotiators have finally released the text of a “deal” they’ve been hashing out for two months to trade $61 billion in foreign aid to Ukraine for border “reforms”. There’s some good in that bill and a lot of bad — much of it so expertly written that it would take thousands of words to explain why it’s bad. Here’s a brief taste.
Doesn’t Close the Loopholes. Anyone familiar with the border crises that have confronted not only President Biden, but also presidents Trump and Obama, understands that there are three loopholes that smugglers have exploited for over a decade: an exception for the quick removal of unaccompanied alien children (UACs) from non-contiguous countries in a poorly thought-out 2008 bill; a 20-day release requirement for adults who enter illegally with children in “family units” (FMUs), the product of a poorly though-out 2015 district court decision; and the low “credible fear” standard for border migrants seeking asylum.
This bill not only does little to close the second and third loopholes, it actually makes the first worse. It increases the perverse incentives that encourage parents to entrust their children with rapacious smugglers to begin with by ensuring that the ones aged 13 and younger receive free, taxpayer-funded legal counsel (sec. 3512).
Family Units and Credible Fear. The FMU issue and the credible-fear loophole are tied together to a degree in the bill, starting with section 3141, which would add a new section 235B to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and create something called “Provisional Noncustodial Removal Proceedings” (PNRP).
That section would allow the DHS secretary — based only on undefined “operational circumstances” — to send migrants to PNRP if they express a fear of persecution or request asylum. Those are the exact same triggers for credible fear interviews in the current section 235(b)(1) of the INA for aliens at the borders and the ports who have either fraudulent admission documents or no documents at all (including illegal migrants).
Unlike section 235(b)(1) of the INA — which mandates detention for illegal migrants who are subject to expedited removal, including those found to have valid credible fear claims — that PNRP process under proposed section 235B of the INA mandates release. Not “authorizes” release — mandates it.
Release for the adults in PNRPs would be premised on those aliens being placed on “alternatives to detention” (ATD), but even that rule is not absolute. Only the adult head of a household released under PNRP is subject to ATD, not other adults and not the children. That ATD is a costly failure that does nothing to ensure that aliens appear for removal has been seemingly ignored.
In any event, once those aliens are released from custody under PNRP, they’re expected to appear within 90 days at a “protection determination interview” (PDI). There is a load of protections for the alien in that process — including the right to counsel and a provision barring that interview from occurring at an ICE office — and none for the American people or the rule of law.
At that PDI, the asylum officer may decide whether the alien should be granted asylum or another form of humanitarian relief (withholding of removal —“statutory withholding” — under section 241(b)(3) of the INA or protection under CAT — the “Convention Against Torture”).
That essentially combines the current credible fear interview process under section 235(b)(1) of the INA with the asylum adjudication process into one — without any of the protections immigration courts offer to ensure that bogus or fraudulent claims don’t result in asylum grants.
https://cis.org/Arthur/Good-and-Lot-...te-Border-Deal
From the Federation for American Immigration Reform:
The long-awaited ‘border security’ agreement negotiated by the Senate Working Group would bring neither border security nor relief from the unprecedented wave of illegal immigration that began the day President Biden took office, charged the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). Rather, the proposal would ratify ongoing illegal immigration at historically high levels.
“The Senate plan does nothing to end the incentives to illegally immigrate to the United States that have resulted in some 10 million people crossing our borders illegally over the past three years. The proposal does not stop mass catch-and-release or end asylum abuse. Instead, it actually codifies a process to automatically release anyone claiming asylum, encouraging more abuse of the system. In addition, the immigration package does nothing to limit the parole authority that has been abused by Secretary Mayorkas, and in fact allows the illegal parole programs and the CBP One App scheme to continue unabated.
“The Working Group plan would actually codify the acceptance of staggering levels of illegal immigration that exceed the number of legal immigrants we admit each year. DHS’s authority to expel people entering the country illegally, which was touted as revolutionary, is actually discretionary and sunsets after three years. The border will remain open, despite what the working group says, and this bill declares that 4,000 or 5,000 encounters a day is acceptable. The Senate plan would sanction illegal immigration levels of up to 1,825,000 a year – which is beyond crisis levels.
“Worse yet, the Senate plan further incentivizes illegal immigration by granting asylum-seekers work permits nearly immediately, allowing certain aliens who have been paroled to gain citizenship, increasing green card numbers and providing taxpayer funding for legal counsel for illegal aliens.
“The bill fails at every level and is a massive giveaway to illegal aliens, which was completely predictable given that they negotiated with the Secretary who willfully and knowingly created this border crisis.”
Additionally, the Senate proposal:
* Incentivizes more asylum abuse by near-immediate issuance of work permits to ‘asylum-seekers,’ rather than requiring them to wait and ensure that their claims are not frivolous.
* Relaxes work permits for those claiming asylum and extends their validity to two years.
* Codifies the Biden Administration asylum rule allowing asylum officers – instead of immigration judges – to decide the merits of asylum cases.
* Allows those denied asylum to appeal their decision over and over, even creating new bureaucratic processes to ensure they are not removed in a timely manner.
* Provides taxpayer-funded legal representation to unaccompanied minors.
* Appropriates $2.3 billion for refugee programs (primarily for illegal aliens arriving from Cuba and Haiti), $850 million for State to address humanitarian needs in Central and South America, $415 million to address irregular migration and provide funds to foreign countries to receive and integrate their illegal aliens, and nearly $4 billion for USCIS, including half a billion dollars for facilities.
* Directs $1.4 billion to the Shelter and Services Program (SSP), which awards grants to nongovernmental organizations that facilitate illegal immigration.
* Prohibits protection determinations of illegal aliens in ICE and CBP facilities, forcing USCIS to construct new facilities to carry out its new duties, thus delaying the effective date of the new policies.
* Provides a path to citizenship for those illegally paroled in from Afghanistan while not ending the ability of the Secretary to repeat the abuse in the future.
* Requires USCIS officers that deny a protection claim to also provide the alien with options on departing the United States.
* Requires the Secretary to issue reports on parole – rather than reining in his abuse – requirements which he has clearly ignored the last three years.
* Contains provisions that have nothing to do with securing our border, such as adding 50,000 new green cards per year for five years and granting work authorization to the spouses and children of H-1B workers.
“The Senate plan is nothing more than a capitulation to mass illegal immigration, rather than a credible plan to regain control of our borders and immigration system,” Stein charged. “We urge the full Senate to reject the Working Group’s proposal and the House to remain steadfast in its insistence that aid to our allies, in their efforts to protect their security, be contingent on real policy changes to secure our own borders and protect the security of the United States,” Stein concluded.
https://www.fairus.org/fair-senate-i...-border-crisis
Quoting white supremacist anti immigration hate groups founded by John tanton. That’s a new one
A normal person would be embarrassed by continuing to be proven wrong over and over, but not you. You are “resilient” that’s for sure.
Congressman Byron Donalds: The Senate deal is TERRIBLE:
1–Codifies Catch & Release
2–Lets in 1.8M Illegals
3–Funds Sanctuary Cities
4–Funds NGOs Moving Illegals
5–Taxpayer-Funded Lawyers to Illegals
6–Work Permits to Illegals
7–Nothing To Deport Illegals
8–No Immediate Wall Funds
9–Weaker Asylum Screening
Sen J.D. Vance: "Granting Mayorkas the ability to grant asylum claims without going through immigration court is perhaps the worst provision of the bill."
Sen Mike Lee: "Here are a “dirty dozen” of disasters I’ve found in this terrible border bill… and this is just the beginning": https://twitter.com/SenMikeLee/statu...515974/photo/1
Sen Tom Cotton: "I’ve reviewed the bill, I don’t think it will solve our border crisis, and might make it worse. I will oppose it. Joe Biden created this crisis by design. He can and should reverse his open border policies today. Here are a few of my concerns: https://twitter.com/SenTomCotton/sta...46276660588752
Rep. Mark Green, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said in a written statement Sunday night that he “will vehemently oppose any agreement that legitimizes or normalizes any level of illegal immigration.”
Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said he “can’t support a bill that doesn’t secure the border, provides taxpayer-funded lawyers to illegal immigrants, and gives billions to radical open borders groups.” “I’m a no,” Daines added.
U.S. Rep. Dale Strong (R-Huntsville) believes the legislation will not actually solve the current crisis. “After reviewing the 370 pages released by the Senate, I am concerned that the emergency authorities are so riddled with exceptions, loopholes, and waivers that it will not meaningfully improve our border crisis,” Strong said in a statement. “For example, the bill creates a new ‘Border Emergency Authority,’ but only allows the President to use it for under nine months of the year, and only after at least 4,000 illegal aliens cross in a day. I don’t believe that the Senate proposal even represents incremental progress.”
U.S. Rep. Jerry Carl (R-Mobile): “The Senate ‘border bill’ allows 5,000 immigrants a day into our country…and that’s just the beginning,” Carl said. “This bill does nothing but reward illegal immigration into the U.S. We need to finish the wall and end the border crisis. The Senate MUST pass HR 2.”
Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., called the bill “the worst idea on border ‘security’— EVER” and “a disaster.”
The US Border Patrol union endorsed the bi-partisan bill.
Meanwhile, another example of this continues:
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...3OYlg&usqp=CAU
Had to laugh on this one. Is he saying this bill drafted by both democrats and republicans is worse than the current state of affairs on the border?Quote:
Originally Posted by XU_Lou
In all seriousness, if people cross the border, they should be detained and deported back to their country. Crossing illegally should be met with strong and swift action. Not sure why this is so difficult for these politicians to understand. Put the funding and enforcement in place to fix this problem moving forward. I agree that there are to many loopholes and added language within this proposed bill that are not needed and won’t fix the border.
So Lou where did lankford lie again? Do you need a dictionary to understand the difference between crossing and encounter? I could send you one free of charge since you must be in dire financial shape.
Found this to be quite comical. It's clear she hadn't read one part of it. Guessing that's the case with most of the MAGA crew.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...5ead9cfa&ei=11