Nolan writes:
“. . . .
Yet no matter how Flake describes the proposal, it is not a good faith attempt to find common ground with either the majority of congressional Republicans or the president.
Five of the six senators in the Gang of Six were also in 2013’s the Gang of Eight, which showed the same disregard for majority Republican positions when they moved the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013, S. 744, through the Senate.
S. 744 was bipartisan too, but it was opposed by 70 percent of the Senate Republicans. Among other things, it would have established a large legalization program without assurance that the aliens being legalized would not be replaced in 10 years by a new group of undocumented aliens.
This has been the sine qua non for Republican cooperation with a legalization program since the failed implementation of the enforcement provisions in the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, (IRCA), which legalized 2.7 million aliens.
One of IRCA’s major objectives was to wipe the slate clean and start over with an effective enforcement program. But IRCA’s enforcement measures were not implemented, and by October 1996, the undocumented alien population had almost doubled.
. . . .
Trump wants a physical wall. Virtual walls rely primarily on surveillance technology, which just notifies the border patrol when aliens are making an illegal crossing. They will be in the United States before they can be apprehended, and Trump’s enforcement program suffers already from an immigration court backlog crisis.
A physical wall makes illegal crossings more difficult. While some grown men can climb over a large wall, children can’t, and the dangers involved in climbing over such a wall should deter parents from bringing their children here illegally.
If the Democrats really want to help the DACA participants, they will let Trump have his wall.”
*****************************************
I probably see it more the way the Washington Post did in yesterday’s lead editorial. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ignore-the-president-vote-on-the-daca-deal/2018/01/16/55f38288-fb03-11e7-8f66-2df0b94bb98a_story.html
There apparently are enough Democratic and GOP votes to pass the “Gang of Six” compromise. Why be held hostage by GOP legislators who, while perhaps they are a majority of the GOP, are a minority of the total legislature and actually represent a minority position among Americans? Some days Trump says he’ll sign anything Congress passes; other days he doesn’t. So, give him the bill and see what happens. Seems unlikely that he will veto his own budget.
On the other hand, at this point, I’d be willing to give Trump his Wall (but not an end to “chain migration” or permanent cuts in permanent immigration) if that’s what it takes to save the Dreamers. Unlike Nolan, however, my experience tells me that “The Wall” will ultimately be an expensive failure. Whatever the technical difficulties with past “Virtual Walls” might have been, I have to believe that technology, which tends to improve over time, not physical barriers are the wave of the future.
And the real solution to individuals coming here without documents is a more robust and realistic legal immigration program that meets market demands for additional labor and also satisfies our humanitarian obligations.
Most of the current adult so-called “undocumented” residents of the U.S. are gainfully employed in ways that actually help and support the U.S. They are a huge net “plus.” So, why would we want to go to great lengths in a futile attempt to keep folks like them from coming in to help us in the future? Doesn’t make any sense! That’s why we’re in the current situation — unrealistic laws.
The real solution is more legal immigration which would insure that those coming get properly screened and don’t have to use the services of smugglers. Then, immigration enforcement could concentrate on those seeking to come outside the system.
Leaving aside refugees, why would folks come if the job market actually gets to the point where it is saturated and can no longer expand? For the most part, they wouldn’t. But, of course, that wouldn’t satisfy the GOP White Nationalist restrictionists who are operating from a racial rather than a realistic perspective.
PWS
01-18-18
Paul says, “There apparently are enough Democratic and GOP votes to pass the “Gang of Six” compromise. Why be held hostage by GOP legislators who, while perhaps they are a majority of the GOP, are a minority of the total legislature and actually represent a minority position among Americans?”
That’s not the way the legislative process works. A bill of that magnitude and complexity ordinarily goes through regular order, which means exposing it to the checks and balances of hearings and markup in the Committees with subject matter jurisdiction. Leadership in the Senate and House have the authority to skip regular order, but they have said that they aren’t going to put the Gang of Six bill on the floor unless Trump tells them he will sign it. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/16/graham-durbin-hit-gop-roadblock-congress-daca-deal/ And that is not going to happen.
Paul says, “On the other hand, at this point, I’d be willing to give Trump his Wall (but not an end to “chain migration” or permanent cuts in permanent immigration) if that’s what it takes to save the Dreamers.”
If by save the Dreamers, Paul means a DREAM Act, that’s not what Trump was thinking about when he made his offer. He was thinking about a DACA fix, which is what everyone is demanding, although they are trying to get a DREAM Act. In other words, just the temporary lawful status and work authorization provided by DACA.
Paul says, “Unlike Nolan, however, my experience tells me that “The Wall” will ultimately be an expensive failure. Whatever the technical difficulties with past “Virtual Walls” might have been, I have to believe that technology, which tends to improve over time, not physical barriers are the wave of the future.”
As I explain in my article, a virtual wall, which is made up of surveillance technology, just notifies the border patrol when an illegal crossing is being made. By the time the aliens can be apprehended, they are already in the United States, which is particularly problematic for Trump’s enforcement program when the are unaccompanied minors because they are entitled to asylum hearings. They are a major obstacle to eliminating the immigration court backlog crisis.
Trump wants a 30-foot high physical wall. While athletic young men may be able to climb over such a wall, most illegal crossers won’t be able to. And the technology Paul is talking about will be used to uncover tunnels. A wall will be especially effective at preventing children from crossing.
Will it stop everyone? Of course not, but if we rejected enforcement devices because they aren’t 100% effective, what would we be left with?
Paul says, “And the real solution to individuals coming here without documents is a more robust and realistic legal immigration program that meets market demands for additional labor and also satisfies our humanitarian obligations.”
Paul is as likely to persuade the Republicans to follow that advice as the Republicans would be to persuade him that every undocumented alien in the country should be deported.
And he antagonizes the Republicans that are needed to pass immigration reform legislation with comments like, “But, of course, that wouldn’t satisfy the GOP White Nationalist restrictionists who are operating from a racial rather than a realistic perspective.”
Can someone explain to me why people think they are encouraging Trump and the other Republicans to be more cooperative on immigration reform by calling them racists? As far as I can tell, that’s about as effective as telling your girl friend she looks fat in her new dress when you are trying to seduce her.
Dear Judge Schmidt – May I dare to reply????
Comments are always welcome, Rox.
Best,
PWS