Dems signal flexibility at border meeting

[mystery-ak]

Dems signal flexibility at border meeting
By Niv Elis and Mike Lillis - 01/30/19 05:35 PM EST

Democrats on Wednesday strongly suggested they are open to a compromise with President Trump even as they unveiled an initial proposal for securing the border that includes no physical barriers.

Democratic leaders emerged from a bipartisan budget meeting on border security taking a hard line on Trump’s proposed border wall, while hinting they were open to a deal.

“We will expand on the $1.6 billion for border security-related programs that House Democrats have already passed,” House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) said at a conference committee meeting.

She said smart border security would not be overly reliant on physical barriers but on better technology and more personnel, a phrasing that left open the possibility of barriers.

more
https://thehill.com/policy/finance/427746-dems-signal-flexibility-at-border-meeting

[Formerly Once-Ler]

As long as Trump doesn't want a wall, the rats are ready to spend trillion$.

[jafo2010]

I consider every politician that does not support a wall on our southern border an enemy of the state, for they fully support an unchecked cartel operation of drug smuggling, sexual slavery(tens of thousands), and drugs that are killing tens of thousands of Americans.  More people die each year or are enslaved than died in the Vietnam War's entirety.  Criminal is what it it, and Trump needs to indicate the Dems are criminal with their mindset.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I consider every politician that does not support a wall on our southern border an enemy of the state

I consider every politician that does support a wall on our southern border a Mexican hating racist or an opportunist that doesn't mind their crappy reputation..

[Smokin Joe]

I consider every politician that does support a wall on our southern border a Mexican hating racist or an opportunist that doesn't mind their crappy reputation..

Mind expounding on why you are against this?

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Mind expounding on why you are against this?

I think it is a huge waste of money that will not solve problems of illegal immigration, drugs and crime, or terrorism.  It's also a solution that can't be enacted and is designed to appeal to the worst of humanity.

[Smokin Joe]

I think it is a huge waste of money that will not solve problems of illegal immigration, drugs and crime, or terrorism.

It won't solve the problem. Not completely, and nothing will. There will always be those who will find a reason (drugs and crime still being lucrative pursuits for some), and a way.

But those are one end of the bell curve. Get down in the middle, and anything to make illegally entering harder becomes a deterrent. Make it hard enough and people who really do want a better life might band together to build one where they are, not just go looking to lay down in greener pastures.

Obviously, some sort of immigration reform is needed, but it has no built in incentives when just going across the fence, hopping over a "normandy barrier", or the like can be done, and with a little evasion and luck, someone can make it to a 'sanctuary'.

IF coupled with stronger enforcement (made possible by reduced inflow), the end of 'sanctuary' areas, the end of welfare benefits, and swift repatriation, I think this has some potential to work.

What I see the barrier as doing is reducing the infiltration to more policeable levels, channeling traffic through smaller corridors, and thus reducing the area to be covered by other assets.

[libertybele]

I think it is a huge waste of money that will not solve problems of illegal immigration, drugs and crime, or terrorism.  It's also a solution that can't be enacted and is designed to appeal to the worst of humanity.

A wall will not solve all problems of illegal immigration, but it certainly is a physical barrier that will greatly enhance the efforts of border patrol and will largely decrease the illegals entering this country. 

A wall combined with more border patrol agents, better technology, and enforcing existing laws WILL be highly successful in combating illegal immigration.

I will make an old analogy.  If you want to keep people who you don't want out of your home do you eliminate putting doors on your home or do you put doors on your home with locks?  Granted if someone wants to break into your home, they will make that attempt, but having a door makes it more difficult for them to enter than if there were no doors.  Having doors also enables you to have time to react.  If you had a guard outside your home to prevent them from coming in along with a door and a security system, your odds of someone wanting to break into your home dramatically decreases.  That simple.

[Wingnut]

I think it is a huge waste of money that will not solve problems of illegal immigration, drugs and crime, or terrorism.  It's also a solution that can't be enacted and is designed to appeal to the worst of humanity.

It is a "shovel ready" jobs program.

[skeeter]

It is a "shovel ready" jobs program.

Indeed. Think of it as a civil work relief program commissioned by the government to grant American tradesmen the dignity of a job.

What could be more moral?

[Wingnut]

Indeed. Think of it as a civil work relief program commissioned by the government to grant American tradesmen the dignity of a job.

What could be more moral?

<_{"Battle Hymn of the Republic" is playing softly in the background}> Just like when the railroads were being built to link our great nation and bring prosperity to all, we employed thousands of our yellow brothers, lifting them up and out of poverty so they could start restaurants and laundries all across this great land.  To embark on this mighty task we could build this enterprising project in the same manner... using illegals as laborers.  If they collapse in the summer heat we will dock them a days pay for taking a siesta on the job.  Now I ask you Do we have the strength to carry on this; or are we just jerking off?

[Bigun]

I consider every politician that does support a wall on our southern border a Mexican hating racist or an opportunist that doesn't mind their crappy reputation..

Are you aware that it's not just Mexicans coming across that border illegally?  If not, you are SORELY misinformed!

[Smokin Joe]

<_{"Battle Hymn of the Republic" is playing softly in the background}> Just like when the railroads were being built to link our great nation and bring prosperity to all, we employed thousands of our yellow brothers, lifting them up and out of poverty so they could start restaurants and laundries all across this great land.  To embark on this mighty task we could build this enterprising project in the same manner... using illegals as laborers.  If they collapse in the summer heat we will dock them a days pay for taking a siesta on the job.  Now I ask you Do we have the strength to carry on this; or are we just jerking off?

When I learned to drive, I drove over bridges built by WPA, which put American men to work during the Depression , one of my grand fathers among them. Much of the infrastructure in National Parks was built the same way, by people working for the WPA during the Depression.
Point being, there are still those who would like jobs which pay decently, and the opportunity to learn some skills, right here in the USA.

[Wingnut]

When I learned to drive, I drove over bridges built by WPA, which put American men to work during the Depression , one of my grand fathers among them. Much of the infrastructure in National Parks was built the same way, by people working for the WPA during the Depression.

I think of that every time I ride on the Natches Trace.  It is a marvel.

[Cyber Liberty]

I think it is a huge waste of money that will not solve problems of illegal immigration, drugs and crime, or terrorism.  It's also a solution that can't be enacted and is designed to appeal to the worst of humanity.

I think people who live near the Southern border have a better idea of what would work than somebody who's major immigration problem is recalcitrant Canadians.

Your posts suggest more than a nod to the fallacy, "The proposed solution won't fix 100% of the problem, so we should do 0% to fix it."

I'm sure your criticism of a physical barrier at the Southern border is more than just a knee-jerk dislike of Donald Trump, or I would not have wasted the time writing this post.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Get down in the middle, and anything to make illegally entering harder becomes a deterrent.

President Trump's policy of separating illegal immigrant children from their parents hurt the cause of border security because it turned off voters.  There are unintended consequences for anything that gives David Duke a boner.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Are you aware that it's not just Mexicans coming across that border illegally?  If not, you are SORELY misinformed!

Are you aware most illegals are coming through legal points of entry and overstaying their VISAs? 

[libertybele]

President Trump's policy of separating illegal immigrant children from their parents hurt the cause of border security because it turned off voters.  There are unintended consequences for anything that gives David Duke a boner.

The parents are endangering their children by making the trek to come here; drug dealers, coyotes, and the elements. If anything the parents should be arrested for child endangerment.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I think people who live near the Southern border have a better idea of what would work than somebody who's major immigration problem is recalcitrant Canadians.

Your posts suggest more than a nod to the fallacy, "The proposed solution won't fix 100% of the problem, so we should do 0% to fix it."

I'm sure your criticism of a physical barrier at the Southern border is more than just a knee-jerk dislike of Donald Trump, or I would not have wasted the time writing this post.

I rejected a wall long before Trump ran in 2015.  It's not a new issue.  Border freaks like Pat Buchannan, Alan Keyes, and Chris Simcox have proposed it for years.  It's just rational politicians never entertained the notion that voters were dumb enough to believe it or evil enough to want it.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

The parents are endangering their children by making the trek to come here; drug dealers, coyotes, and the elements. If anything the parents should be arrested for child endangerment.

...so screw the kids.  Got it.

[Bigun]

Are you aware most illegals are coming through legal points of entry and overstaying their VISAs?

I'm aware that is the propaganda you are trying to sell me and I'm also aware that it's 100% USDA Choice bovine fecal matter!  But that is not to say it isn't a problem and one that can be easily dealt with.   Singapore rules will stop that crap immediately!

[Cyber Liberty]

I rejected a wall long before Trump ran in 2015.  It's not a new issue.  Border freaks like Pat Buchannan, Alan Keyes, and Chris Simcox have proposed it for years.  It's just rational politicians never entertained the notion that voters were dumb enough to believe it or evil enough to want it.

"Evil" or "dumb?"  Really?  Briefers are "evil" now.   

I'd say it's a new low, but I don't read all your posts so the possibility exists you've made this assertion before.

[Cyber Liberty]

Are you aware most illegals are coming through legal points of entry and overstaying their VISAs?

A problem that also needs fixing, but because of it, we should leave the physical borders wide open and free for people to cross over illegally.  This is that falacy to which I referred earlier:  "Can't stop 100%, so we need to give up and stop 0%."

[240B]

...so screw the kids.  Got it.

That's exactly what is happening. Many of those kids are abducted by coyotes specifically to be used at the border. The kids are frequently raped on the way to the border and then once in America they are sold off into child labor or used as sex slaves.

If Democrats really cared about "the children" they wouldn't be fighting to keep them in the hands of sex trafficking pimps. It is an act of kindness to verify that the children are actually related to the adult they are with. It has been done with every administration before. Clinton, Bush, Obama, all did the same thing. It is only since Trump has become the President that it is an issue.

[libertybele]

Are you aware most illegals are coming through legal points of entry and overstaying their VISAs?

That's a common talking point from pro-illegal immigration groups.

Are you aware that one in five inmates is an illegal criminal?  Stats vary; some say 26% of the population, other stats show over 30%. That widely invalidates that most are coming here for a better way of life.  They cost the taxpayers millions every year. Quite frankly, I don't care to support them anymore.

Are you aware  that Americans cross-subsidize health care for unauthorized immigrants at a cost of appx. $18.5 billion a year?  In 2016, federal taxpayers provided $11.2 billion in subsidized care to illegal immigrants.

If I were to believe that most illegals come through legal points of entry and over stay their visas, then it supports my idea that there should be a moratorium on ALL migration to the U.S. (no visas allowed) until we have an adequate barrier along the entire border, more border patrol agents, control of our VISA system and close down ALL ports of entry till we have adequate means to track, log and vet them and a way to ensure that those that over stay their visas WILL be deported immediately.