Immigration Policy

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 27987
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by The Meal »

Hey!
"Better to talk to people than communicate via tweet." — Elontra
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8486
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Alefroth »

When a new page makes it a non-sequitur.
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Little Raven »



Glenn has his issues, but I'm not sure he's wrong about this.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jaymann »

Let me get this straight, Biden has failed to solve the border crises in his first 80 days? What's he been doing, playing golf?
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Little Raven »

It's not that. Immigration is a wicked problem - no sane person expects Biden to solve it in 90 days - or even at all. This is not something a President can solve.

What's shocking is the difference is in tone that the media is taking. When Trump was in charge, the editorial pages of the NYTimes were a non-stop litany of condemnation for the "concentration camps" on the border. "Kids in Cages" was a constant rallying cry.

There are more kids in cages now than at any point in the last 4 years, but now its not even a "crisis" - it's a "challenge." :lol:
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

Little Raven wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 2:07 amWhat's shocking is the difference is in tone that the media is taking. When Trump was in charge, the editorial pages of the NYTimes were a non-stop litany of condemnation for the "concentration camps" on the border. "Kids in Cages" was a constant rallying cry.
This is really hard to quantify. I just did a quick scan, the NY Times, Atlantic, Washington Post had fairly neutral articles describing the changes in immigration policy Trump instituted at the beginning of his administration. And this was during the time of the so-called muslim ban, firing Sally Yates, and threatening to hold DACA hostage.

What happened was it really blew apart as 2017 went on and especially in early 2018 when we found out about the child separation policy. In other words, the media's "tone" was an outcome of reporting on Trump's rhetoric and policy action. Trump drove the negative tone.

Whereas as far as I can see no one is denying that there is a surge happening now. In fact, there is a lot of "crisis" talk. Almost all driven by the right. We had US Senators patrolling the border and claiming they got heckled by coyotes and border crossers. And the media is to some degree taking those cues from them. For exampe, at the recent press conference Biden, Republican talking points turned into direct questions to Biden.

So what's different? I think on the topic of "tone" is that Biden and the administration itself have changed it. We aren't turning children away and sending them back to Mexico alone for instance. And the GOP has howled about that humane approach and because every story must have a GOP viewpoint to "balance" it, these ideas have had significant airtime from mainstream media outlets.
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 19978
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Carpet_pissr »

Little Raven wrote:It's not that. Immigration is a wicked problem - no sane person expects Biden to solve it in 90 days - or even at all. This is not something a President can solve.

What's shocking is the difference is in tone that the media is taking. When Trump was in charge, the editorial pages of the NYTimes were a non-stop litany of condemnation for the "concentration camps" on the border. "Kids in Cages" was a constant rallying cry.

There are more kids in cages now than at any point in the last 4 years, but now its not even a "crisis" - it's a "challenge." :lol:
Fair criticism, though rhetoric from each admin couldn’t be more different, and I think the media feeds on that.

A ranty, angry blustery orange man who got elected in large part by vilifying immigrants and The Other. Stephen Miller. Nuff said.

Vs uncle Joe who has actively denounced that whole “keep the dirty, poor, rapey Mexicans out at all costs!” mentality.

A truly neutral reporting might be “though the tone and rhetoric of the Biden administration regarding immigration couldn’t be more different than Trump, the reality is that the conditions on the ground at the border are no better...” or something to that effect.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LawBeefaroni »

At least everyone can agree that kids in cages really are one of the best political footballs.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jaymann »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 11:49 am At least everyone can agree that kids in cages really are one of the best political footballs.
And if they upgraded the facilities, Repugnicans would scream, "Kids in luxury apartments!"
Last edited by Jaymann on Mon Apr 12, 2021 10:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Kraken »

Carpet_pissr wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 10:42 am A truly neutral reporting might be “though the tone and rhetoric of the Biden administration regarding immigration couldn’t be more different than Trump, the reality is that the conditions on the ground at the border are no better...” or something to that effect.
Trump's policies were cruel. Biden's are rooted in compassion. That hasn't changed the reality on the ground (yet) because changing the infrastructure and enforcement apparatus takes time, and changing the dynamics that drive immigration takes Congressional action.

If there's no improvement by the time next spring's surge happens, then Joe's got some splainin to do. Or rather, Kamala does, since this is her wheelhouse now. For now, I think they can only try to make the best of an overwhelmed inadequate system.
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Unagi »

Little Raven wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 2:07 am It's not that. Immigration is a wicked problem - no sane person expects Biden to solve it in 90 days - or even at all. This is not something a President can solve.

What's shocking is the difference is in tone that the media is taking. When Trump was in charge, the editorial pages of the NYTimes were a non-stop litany of condemnation for the "concentration camps" on the border. "Kids in Cages" was a constant rallying cry.

There are more kids in cages now than at any point in the last 4 years, but now its not even a "crisis" - it's a "challenge." :lol:
Perhaps they realized that the Trump administration needed to be publicly shamed into acting in a better way, and conversely they don't yet feel that Biden needs that type of pressure in order to do the right thing?
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Little Raven »

Unagi wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 10:54 pmPerhaps they realized that the Trump administration needed to be publicly shamed into acting in a better way, and conversely they don't yet feel that Biden needs that type of pressure in order to do the right thing?
What exactly about Trump's life would make any reasonable person believe he could be shamed into doing anything?

It would be one thing if such rhetoric were harmless, but it's not. Don't get me wrong, I believe that the tone the media is taking now is by far the more responsible. Immigration is a challenge, and our system is highly imperfect, but we are not building concentration camps along the border, and ICE is not up of Nazis. But having spent 2 years Godwinning themselves with the volume set to 11, mainstream media now finds it difficult to engage constructively with the topic - which is a real shame, because we're going to need to do something....soon.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

But having spent 2 years Godwinning themselves with the volume set to 11, mainstream media now finds it difficult to engage constructively with the topic - which is a real shame, because we're going to need to do something....soon.
This is simply not accurate. There certainly were some pundits talking that way. The liberal twitterverse certainly was talking this way (set at 11). But the major news networks? This isn't how they report things.

In fact, we saw a trend to tamp down that kind of language. For example, Charles Blow at (article here at NY Times) wrote an OpEd to talk about why the media shouldn't use the term. However, as he did so he described the problems that an Inspector General reported such as "egregious conditions" at the camp to properly contextualize where it was coming from. He literally talked about Godwin's Law and quoted Chris Hayes who recommended using the word 'detention camps'. That was the MSM trying to police the rhetoric. It wasn't running at 11 the whole time. Where there was certainly negative tone it was nearly all driven by Trump.
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Unagi »

Little Raven wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:22 am
Unagi wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 10:54 pmPerhaps they realized that the Trump administration needed to be publicly shamed into acting in a better way, and conversely they don't yet feel that Biden needs that type of pressure in order to do the right thing?
What exactly about Trump's life would make any reasonable person believe he could be shamed into doing anything?

It would be one thing if such rhetoric were harmless, but it's not. Don't get me wrong, I believe that the tone the media is taking now is by far the more responsible. Immigration is a challenge, and our system is highly imperfect, but we are not building concentration camps along the border, and ICE is not up of Nazis. But having spent 2 years Godwinning themselves with the volume set to 11, mainstream media now finds it difficult to engage constructively with the topic - which is a real shame, because we're going to need to do something....soon.
I didn’t see so much ‘Nazi’ comparison in the past as you make it seem.

And. I said ‘administration’ not ‘Trump’. And the idea was that you needed to convince ‘them’ that their approach and policy was -evil-... (not Trump)
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Unagi »

malchior wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:48 am
But having spent 2 years Godwinning themselves with the volume set to 11, mainstream media now finds it difficult to engage constructively with the topic - which is a real shame, because we're going to need to do something....soon.
This is simply not accurate. There certainly were some pundits talking that way. The liberal twitterverse certainly was talking this way (set at 11). But the major news networks? This isn't how they report things.

In fact, we saw a trend to tamp down that kind of language. For example, Charles Blow at (article here at NY Times) wrote an OpEd to talk about why the media shouldn't use the term. However, as he did so he described the problems that an Inspector General reported such as "egregious conditions" at the camp to properly contextualize where it was coming from. He literally talked about Godwin's Law and quoted Chris Hayes who recommended using the word 'detention camps'. That was the MSM trying to police the rhetoric. It wasn't running at 11 the whole time. Where there was certainly negative tone it was nearly all driven by Trump.
Thanks. That was what I was trying to articulate as well, regarding the Godwinning
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jaymann »

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick
@ReichlinMelnick
Meanwhile, while all this trolling goes on by Rep. Boebert and the right wing, the Biden administration has quietly been extremely effective over the last month at getting kids out of Border Patrol custody.

The number of kids in Border Patrol custody has dropped 82% in a month.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Defiant »

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Kraken »

We need more immigrants: US birth rate hit another record low last year.
U.S. birth and fertility rates in 2020 dropped to another record low as births fell for the sixth consecutive year to the lowest levels since 1979, according to new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics.

The number of births in the U.S. declined last year by 4% from 2019, double the average annual rate of decline of 2% since 2014, the CDC said in preliminary birth data released Wednesday. Total fertility rates and general fertility rates also declined by 4% since 2019, reaching record lows. The U.S. birth rate is so low, the nation is “below replacement levels,” meaning more people die every day than are being born, the CDC said.

Overall, the number of births declined 3% for Hispanic women and 4% for white and Black women from 2019 to 2020.

Teen birth rates dropped considerably with births to 15- to-17-year olds falling by 6% and to 18- to-19-year olds falling by 7%, both hitting record lows.

Birth rates among women ages 20 to 24 and 25 to 29 dipped by 6% and 4%, respectively, both to record lows. Birth rates fell by 4% and 2% respectively among women ages 30 to 34 and 35 to 39, but did not reach record lows, according to CDC data.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

Kraken wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 9:59 pm We need more immigrants: US birth rate hit another record low last year.
If the US still had the capability to make long-term strategic policy it'd probably be a competitive race trying to thread a needle on AI/automation and immigration with a short-term immigration blend and a long-term higher education push. We're already deep into an automation revolution now but still need lower end workers. That'll eventually tail off over time. Instead we're going to go full unmanaged/uncontrolled and it'll add pressure into the chaos we'll be seeing over the next few years.
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jaymann »

Fewer people = less stress on the environment.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

CNN
The Supreme Court held on Monday that the government can block non-citizens who are in the US under a program that temporarily protects them from deportation in certain situations from applying for a green card if they entered the country unlawfully.

Justice Elena Kagan wrote for a unanimous court.
Petitioner Jose Santos Sanchez entered this country unlawfully from El Salvador. Years later, because of unsafe living conditions in that country, the Government granted him Temporary Protected Status (TPS), entitling him to stay and work in the United States for as long as those conditions persist. Sanchez now wishes to become a lawful permanent resident (LPR) of the United States. The question here is whether the conferral of TPS enables him to obtain LPR status despite his unlawful entry. We hold that it does not.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

They described this random guy sitting in the river as a 'smuggler ' :lol:

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

CNN
A federal district judge in Texas temporarily blocked Texas Gov. Greg Abbott from implementing an executive order targeting the transport of migrants who are released from custody.

The order, issued last Wednesday, was framed as a public health measure to address Covid-19, which is surging in Texas amid Abbott's opposition to new mask mandates or requirements for vaccines. The Justice Department sued two days later.

DOJ alleged the order -- in which Abbott directed state troopers to stop vehicles suspected of carrying recently released migrants -- violates the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which establishes that federal laws preempt state laws and regulations.

The lawsuit alleged that Abbott's order jeopardizes the "safety of noncitizens in federal custody, risking the safety of federal law enforcement personnel and their families, and exacerbating the spread of COVID-19 in our communities." The department additionally filed an emergency request for a court order that would immediately block Abbott's enforcement of the order.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Little Raven »

Unfortunately, the border continues to look grim.
President Joe Biden in March wrote off a spike in the number of migrants arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border as a result, at least in part, of winter months being the safest time to make the trek. “It happens every single, solitary year,” he said.

Six months into his term, Biden and his team are being proved wrong.

The number of migrants apprehended at the border isn’t going down this summer, even as the heat makes the journey to the U.S. more dangerous. Instead, it has reached a 21-year high — and there’s a record number of unaccompanied children arriving, too.
There is some good news - Biden has a couple of years to fix this. But the border situation is what gave us Trump 5 years ago, and it will threaten to do so again unless something can be done.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

Like many issues this is one where the Republicans have all the advantages. They being far superior at politics have turned this into an issue for a successive line of Presidents when the problem lies firmly as it has for decades in the hands of Congress. It doesn't help that articles like the above engage in journalistic malpractice, lean into this false Republican propaganda framing, and focus only on what administrations do instead of the fact that they have at least one hand at all times tied behind their back by Congress.
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Little Raven »

Biden doesn't have to solve the problem - no President can do that. He just has to manage it better than Trump did. Which is a pretty low bar.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Little Raven »

Problems continue.
Thousands of migrants were crowded under a bridge outside the border community of Del Rio on Thursday, part of a massive surge in migration across the Rio Grande this week that has overwhelmed the authorities and caused significant delays in processing the arrivals.

The U.S. Border Patrol said that more than 9,000 migrants, mostly from Haiti, were being held in a temporary staging area under the Del Rio International Bridge as agents worked as quickly as they could to process them.

The temporary camp has grown with staggering speed in recent days, from just a few hundred people earlier in the week. The authorities and city officials said they expected thousands more to cross the ankle-deep river between Mexico and Del Rio in coming days.

...

The Southwest border has been inundated in recent months with a surge in unauthorized crossings not seen in more than two decades. More than 200,000 people crossed last month, bringing the total this fiscal year to more than 1.5 million.

...

Bruno Lozano, the city’s mayor, described on Thursday squalid conditions under the bridge that more so resembled a shantytown, with little access to clean water and food and just a few portable toilets. The vast majority of those who arrived appeared to be fleeing Haiti, the Caribbean country still reeling from a series of natural disasters and the assassination in July of its president, Jovenel Moïse, local officials said.

“There are 9,000 people really anxious and stressed,” said Mr. Lozano, who has asked federal officials to support his city of 35,000 residents.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Smoove_B »

What in the actual F is happening?


Border patrol is mounted on horseback rounding up Haitian refugees with whips.

This is unfathomable cruelty towards people fleeing disaster and political ruin. The administration must stop this.
There''s video if you click through the Tweet.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

It looks horrible but that tweet text is pretty clickbait-y. They aren't rounding anyone up - they are deterring them from crossing the river into the United States illegally. Watching the video it appears that they are threatening them by spinning the rope. They aren't whipping people. I'm not usually one to defend the border police but this is their job. They are being tasked to do something that is impossible. How do you turn away people who are desperate enough that they are trying to get by mounted officers? I don't know what the border police are supposed to do that won't get people upset and also succeed at enforcing the law. Worse the real fix is in a broken political system that can't even reasonably talk about it - and hyperbole like the Tweet isn't doing anyone favors.

Edit: I figure I'll be crystal clear. I think our immigration policy is bad. I think that ideally we shouldn't be pushing these people into unsafe refugee camps in Mexico. But that is what the law/rules says right now. I don't know what rule is going to be better since we don't really have the capacity to process and house all these refugees. Still I don't think what they are doing above is 'unfathomably cruel'. The child separation policy was. This isn't even in that ballpark. This is pushing people back across the river in accordance with a court order. It's not ideal but it sure as shit isn't "cruel".
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Grifman »

malchior wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:12 pm It looks horrible but that tweet text is pretty clickbait-y. They aren't rounding anyone up - they are deterring them from crossing the river into the United States illegally. Watching the video it appears that they are threatening them by spinning the rope. They aren't whipping people. I'm not usually one to defend the border police but this is their job. They are being tasked to do something that is impossible. How do you turn away people who are desperate enough that they are trying to get by mounted officers? I don't know what the border police are supposed to do that won't get people upset and also succeed at enforcing the law. Worse the real fix is in a broken political system that can't even reasonably talk about it - and hyperbole like the Tweet isn't doing anyone favors.
But is there a really a palatable political solution? As long as there are very poor countries from which people can travel to the US/Mexican border we will see scenes like this. The only way to avoid this is to allow a million plus Central American migrants per year to enter the US - and the vast majority of the American public won't support this. No one wants millions of Haitian's (yes, they are not Central America), Guatemalans, Hondurans, Salvadorans, etc to come to the US. Any politically palatable increased cap in immigration will be far below the demand for immigration to the US - hence you will continue to see the same scenes along the southern border. As long as these countries are immersed in poverty (and I see no real long term solution to that), they will continue to come in numbers that the US political system is not prepared to allow. IMO, there is NO political solution to this problem.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Kraken »

The Senate parliamentarian ruled that immigration reform doesn't belong in the reconciliation bill, so we won't see any reforms anytime soon.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Smoove_B »

malchior wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:12 pm Edit: I figure I'll be crystal clear. I think our immigration policy is bad. I think that ideally we shouldn't be pushing these people into unsafe refugee camps in Mexico. But that is what the law/rules says right now. I don't know what rule is going to be better since we don't really have the capacity to process and house all these refugees. Still I don't think what they are doing above is 'unfathomably cruel'. The child separation policy was. This isn't even in that ballpark. This is pushing people back across the river in accordance with a court order. It's not ideal but it sure as shit isn't "cruel".
I guess it's demonstrably less cruel than shooting them with tear gas, so there's that.

But in terms of how it looks overall? Not great.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

Grifman wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:39 pmBut is there a really a palatable political solution? As long as there are very poor countries from which people can travel to the US/Mexican border we will see scenes like this. The only way to avoid this is to allow a million plus Central American migrants per year to enter the US - and the vast majority of the American public won't support this. No one wants millions of Haitian's (yes, they are not Central America), Guatemalans, Hondurans, Salvadorans, etc to come to the US. Any politically palatable increased cap in immigration will be far below the demand for immigration to the US - hence you will continue to see the same scenes along the southern border. As long as these countries are immersed in poverty (and I see no real long term solution to that), they will continue to come in numbers that the US political system is not prepared to allow. IMO, there is NO political solution to this problem.
In the current reality? Hell no. The cold hard facts are that we have an entire political class that wants to have this border "crisis" all the time for their many reasons. We used to apprehend and deal with WAY MORE people in the early 1970s. LIke 1-2M more a year than we do now. Many in Washington are just more than ok that this is broken.
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Grifman »

malchior wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 6:41 pm We used to apprehend and deal with WAY MORE people in the early 1970s. LIke 1-2M more a year than we do now. Many in Washington are just more than ok that this is broken.
That doesn’t appear to be be true:

https://www.cato.org/blog/deportation-r ... erspective

Annual deportations started increasing dramatically under Clinton and have been at elevated levels ever since.

I’m still not clear what your proposed immigration fix is given the elevated levels of illegals trying to enter the country. Another problem is that previously illegal immigrants were largely single men, who are much less sympathetic and easier to deal with. Now there are large numbers of families, including children, which dramatically complicates the issue.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8486
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Alefroth »

Kraken wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:26 pm The Senate parliamentarian ruled that immigration reform doesn't belong in the reconciliation bill, so we won't see any reforms anytime soon.
Replacing her is one of the ways they can play McConnell level politics. I don't see any drawback to it at this point.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

Grifman wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 7:12 pm
malchior wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 6:41 pm We used to apprehend and deal with WAY MORE people in the early 1970s. LIke 1-2M more a year than we do now. Many in Washington are just more than ok that this is broken.
That doesn’t appear to be be true:

https://www.cato.org/blog/deportation-r ... erspective

Annual deportations started increasing dramatically under Clinton and have been at elevated levels ever since.
That's only deportations. It's an incomplete picture. Apprehensions tell the real story.
I’m still not clear what your proposed immigration fix is given the elevated levels of illegals trying to enter the country.
My first suggestion would be is to look back at how we did it when we were apprehending the numbers above. Like I said we used to stop and turn around a whole lot more people. We only have a crisis/problem because we can't solve political problems and everyone wins when we create them.
Another problem is that previously illegal immigrants were largely single men, who are much less sympathetic and easier to deal with. Now there are large numbers of families, including children, which dramatically complicates the issue.
This is seemingly a cross section of the problem but I'm not sure it is real material. In the sense that it is a problem because our capability to deal with migrant surges has likely been systemically dismantled.

Edit: I'd also accept that the 70s weren't some ideal state either. Only 6-7 years later Reagan built the prototype racist, nativist message around this very issue and started this whole mess.
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Little Raven »

malchior wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 7:38 pmApprehensions tell the real story.
Sure. But they don't tell THIS story.
We used to apprehend and deal with WAY MORE people in the early 1970s. LIke 1-2M more a year than we do now.
Here's the raw data. In 1970, we apprehended 201,780 people along the Southern border. By 1975, that had grown to 512,264. These numbers would see a peak in 1986, with 1,615,844 apprehensions, and in 2000, with 1,643,679. They would then fall quite dramatically...until 2021, when they skyrocketed. It'll be a little while before we know exactly how many we've had in 2021...but it will be a big number.
My first suggestion would be is to look back at how we did it when we were apprehending the numbers above.
People have done that. Sadly, our past experience is of limited value, because in 1986 and 2000, we were almost entirely dealing with Mexican nationals looking for work. We got very, VERY good at dealing with them. We still are. We have loads of people that speak Spanish, loads of contacts inside Mexico to work with, and a system for quickly deporting people back into the Mexican heartland. All it takes is a bus, after all.

But that's not what we're dealing with now. Now we have families, from places much farther away than Mexico, who are looking for asylum, not employment. Many do not speak Spanish. (or English) We have very limited contacts in their home nations. We have no system for rapidly processing/deporting them. Even transporting them home is much a bigger deal - you can't drive to Guatemala.

I also disagree that this is a problem only because Washington wants it to be. It's true that the minority party loves using it as a cudgel against the party in power, and both parties will turn on a dime to exploit it, but this isn't really a crisis that serves one party above the other - it's just a massive headache for whoever is in charge. Nobody really WANTS it to continue, but nobody knows how to solve it, either. It's a truly wicked problem.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

Little Raven wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 7:49 pmPeople have done that. Sadly, our past experience is of limited value, because in 1986 and 2000, we were almost entirely dealing with Mexican nationals looking for work. We got very, VERY good at dealing with them. We still are. We have loads of people that speak Spanish, loads of contacts inside Mexico to work with, and a system for quickly deporting people back into the Mexican heartland. All it takes is a bus, after all.
On the last part I'd argue we don't know that for sure. We didn't collect nationality information for years and documentation isn't reliable even when we started to do it. Second, most (read almost all) of these migrants are native Spanish speakers. I acknowledge that sending them home is more complicated but let's be real here. We never gave a shit really as long as we got the cheap labor to where we needed it. We made noise about improving conditions in their own countries but I've never seen any sort of real effort there. It's all talking points and empty rhetoric. That's why IMO this is just fuel for politicking. Yeah it is a cynical view but we are a cynical nation.
But that's not what we're dealing with now. Now we have families, from places much farther away than Mexico, who are looking for asylum, not employment. Many do not speak Spanish. (or English) We have very limited contacts in their home nations. We have no system for rapidly processing/deporting them. Even transporting them home is much a bigger deal - you can't drive to Guatemala.
True. This is however tied into the systemic reform issues. We don't even legitimately look at streamlining the law or how asylum cases are adjudicated. When you read accounts about how hearings happen now they are pretty much a farce to boot.
I also disagree that this is a problem only because Washington wants it to be. It's true that the minority party loves using it as a cudgel against the party in power, and both parties will turn on a dime to exploit it, but this isn't really a crisis that serves one party above the other - it's just a massive headache for whoever is in charge. Nobody really WANTS it to continue, but nobody knows how to solve it, either. It's a truly wicked problem.
I simply can't agree with that. This is just too naïve a read. The GOP has been using this problem to win elections all through the South for decades. FWIW this isn't my idea. I got it from 'It Was All A Lie' by Stuart Stevens. He was in the GOP trenches and helped develop the messaging back in the late 70s/early 80s. He tells all the gory details. He confirmed it was all intentional when Reagan did it. It likely still is intentional. If I was being really generous to the GOP I'd call it indifference to solving it but too much evidence suggests otherwise. This like many other problems is something they love to put their thumb on for easy votes. And like any other problem they can't let the Democrats solve it.

Anyway the long story is that this surely is complicated. However, the idea that after 40 years of this current legal framework we essentially have no real ideas beyond: build a useless wall, cruel child separation policies, useless adjustments to the immigration cap that don't change the math, and beyond that little to no real ideas from Democrats is indicative of a status quo that everyone wants for their own purposes or doesn't feel like putting any resourcing into. The Biden administrations "plan" is essentially boilerplate proposals that amount to the usual can kicking. For example, 'Making better use of existing enforcement resources'. I wouldn't say that weak sauce is prima facie proof they don't want to solve it. More that they know they can't solve it in this environment and basically dumped out a basic plan just to have one.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Kraken »

Alefroth wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 7:18 pm
Kraken wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:26 pm The Senate parliamentarian ruled that immigration reform doesn't belong in the reconciliation bill, so we won't see any reforms anytime soon.
Replacing her is one of the ways they can play McConnell level politics. I don't see any drawback to it at this point.
Is there evidence that the parliamentarian is partisan? It seems to me that putting immigration reform in a spending bill is a stretch and she made a legitimate call.
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 8608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Little Raven »

Kraken wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 10:12 pmIs there evidence that the parliamentarian is partisan? It seems to me that putting immigration reform in a spending bill is a stretch and she made a legitimate call.
She was hired by Reid, so if she IS partisan, she almost certainly leans blue.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
Post Reply