Both parties have a "solution", they simply are polar opposites and create a political fight.
Repubs want a managed immigration, something you seem to agree with. The key part of that management is securing the border, something you seem to disagree with. Dems want open borders and refuse to support any and all border security and enforcement including current statutes. That leaves the political open spigot/closed spigot. With a repub admin, efforts to secure the border increase and the dems use their political numbers to block investment and legal process. With a dem admin, all border enforcement is stopped cold and repubs use their voice to try and make the people aware of the problems.
A new and somewhat effective strategy has emerged. Shipping illegal migrants to "sanctuary" dem hot spots. They are key to dem election hopes and buy hard on the dem "compassion" for the world's disadvantaged. They reject repub warning on unsustainability. By shipping illegals to them, they are forced to see past the gaslight and experience reality.
I don't believe that any passive solution will work. Wall, moat, barbed wire, thousands of enforcers monioring every inch of the boarder. None of this will work. And we can't afford it.
Texas has spent billions of dollars on border security. But what taxpayers got in return is a mystery.
Over 17 years, Perry and his successor, Gov. Greg Abbott, persuaded the Texas Legislature to spend billions of dollars on border security measures that included at least nine operations and several smaller initiatives. Each time, the governors promised that the state would do what the federal government had failed to: secure the border. The way the governors and their administrations have tracked success has fluctuated over the years, offering little clarity into whether the state is closer to securing the border today than it was nearly 20 years ago.
I don't believe the borders can be secured unless we start killing immigrants as the cross illegally. Then, the word will get out and people will stop coming.
I don't see a solution. You keep talking about securing the border but IT CAN"T BE SECURED!
So, what the fuck are we talking about? And when Democrats hold the Executive office you blame them. This is such a stupid game you are playing.
Texas Tribune is a dishonest, pro-open borders leftist group. Their point, and yours is simple and simply the end of the country- No matter how much we raise taxes, we still have bad roads so we should quit taxing people and working on roads.
You don't cite your standard for "it can't be secured". If the standard is zero, you are (absolutely) correct. It's foolish, impractical and deadly. Like telling a company there is no way to guarantee zero internet breeches of security so why even try? The company could throw in the towel and soon would be gone.
Worse, you don't just believe the country can't be saved, you believe it's already been lost. You think the country is so far gone and pathetic that is is one of the few countries so incompetent and incapable that it can't defend it's borders.
And when Democrats hold the Executive office you blame them.
Ahhh....TDS.
Of your three (3) excuses, this one makes the most sense and is the most lazy and dangerous. I hold people accountable for their policies and policy consequences. All the time, every time. It does happen (and make sense?) that I'm more critical of those policies that I believe are bad and those often are policies advocated by dems. You have become anti-American. Because TDS. I hold dems accountable for abortion on demand not because they are dems but because that is their policy. I hold them responsible for high energy costs because that is their policy.
You don't have a side on policy, you have a side because Trump. That's TDS.
Texas Tribune is a dishonest, pro-open borders leftist group. Their point, and yours is simple and simply the end of the country- No matter how much we raise taxes, we still have bad roads so we should quit taxing people and working on roads.
You don't cite your standard for "it can't be secured". If the standard is zero, you are (absolutely) correct. It's foolish, impractical and deadly. Like telling a company there is no way to guarantee zero internet breeches of security so why even try? The company could throw in the towel and soon would be gone.
Worse, you don't just believe the country can't be saved, you believe it's already been lost. You think the country is so far gone and pathetic that is is one of the few countries so incompetent and incapable that it can't defend it's borders.
And when Democrats hold the Executive office you blame them.
Ahhh....TDS.
Of your three (3) excuses, this one makes the most sense and is the most lazy and dangerous. I hold people accountable for their policies and policy consequences. All the time, every time. It does happen (and make sense?) that I'm more critical of those policies that I believe are bad and those often are policies advocated by dems. You have become anti-American. Because TDS. I hold dems accountable for abortion on demand not because they are dems but because that is their policy. I hold them responsible for high energy costs because that is their policy.
You don't have a side on policy, you have a side because Trump. That's TDS.
Tell me how we secure the border and what your definition of secure is.
The Berlin Wall was 96 miles. Russians shit to kill, The border was secure.
Now tell me how we secure thousands of miles of border
The border isn't just long, it's diverse. That gives the open border crowd an opening to take advantage of the powerfully stupid. They claim the most ignorant shit as a means to fight for open borders (no country).
Consider Italy- Securing the Alps takes a far different strategy than securing the coastline (hopefully that makes sense).
It will take a multi-strategy effort to work at it's best. The combination will take physical barriers and detection/response teams. Barriers come in a couple of types from walls to vehicle blockers. Many places that isn't practical. That means electric/photo/aerial surveillance with a close response team to apprehend illegal crossings. This works in two ways- most places will become impenetrable without time consuming effort. This time gives response teams the chance to intervene. Think: Breaking into a safe gives law enforcement more time to respond than just grabbing cash and running.
Note both (dems and repubs) parties both supported and funded border walls until (wave your TDS card here) Trump made it a campaign issue.
Yes, there remains the reality that you can't get to zero. Zero is the fake excuse for pushing an agenda. We had a breech of data so it's unrealistic to try and limit it as much as possible.
This will direct crossings to the weakest points. Or, is electricity lingo- the path of least resistance. That makes apprehension even easier.
There remains things like going around the border security. Boating around at the Pacific ocean and Gulf of Mexico. Again, we can't eradicate every boating facility on the coasts. Still, going this path is both numerically limited and easily tracked and shut down. Flying them in remains an open possibility with similar problems. Flying thousands of human trafficking planes would quickly be identified and blocked. Flying commercial would require paperwork. Phony docs are possible, some might even work. Still, it would be foolish to say someone forged papers so we need to just quit using them.
And of course, we need to have a better domestic approach than opening the treasury to those who come. We must first accept reality to experience it.
Post by EPIC Sir Tinley on May 21, 2023 6:04:45 GMT -8
NYC turns blind eye as migrants with babies sell fruit along deadly highways By Rich Calder and Georgia Worrell May 20, 2023 6:25pm Updated
Some of New York City’s busiest highways and roads are drawing migrant moms so desperate to make a buck that they hawk mangoes and drinks in traffic — often with babies strapped to their backs.
Along the bustling, notoriously dangerous intersection of Woodhaven Boulevard and Myrtle Avenue in Queens on Friday, two young mothers who illegally migrated three months ago from Ecuador peddled cups of fruit for $5 a pop and bottles of water for a buck.
Maria, 20, had her year-old infant strapped to her back.
Veronica, 25, carried her 3-year-old daughter the same way, weaving around cars to score sales when traffic stopped for a red light.
“We don’t want to be on the street,” said Veronica.
Tell me how we secure the border and what your definition of secure is.
The Berlin Wall was 96 miles. Russians shit to kill, The border was secure.
Now tell me how we secure thousands of miles of border
The border isn't just long, it's diverse. That gives the open border crowd an opening to take advantage of the powerfully stupid. They claim the most ignorant shit as a means to fight for open borders (no country).
Consider Italy- Securing the Alps takes a far different strategy than securing the coastline (hopefully that makes sense).
It will take a multi-strategy effort to work at it's best. The combination will take physical barriers and detection/response teams. Barriers come in a couple of types from walls to vehicle blockers. Many places that isn't practical. That means electric/photo/aerial surveillance with a close response team to apprehend illegal crossings. This works in two ways- most places will become impenetrable without time consuming effort. This time gives response teams the chance to intervene. Think: Breaking into a safe gives law enforcement more time to respond than just grabbing cash and running.
Note both (dems and repubs) parties both supported and funded border walls until (wave your TDS card here) Trump made it a campaign issue.
Yes, there remains the reality that you can't get to zero. Zero is the fake excuse for pushing an agenda. We had a breech of data so it's unrealistic to try and limit it as much as possible.
This will direct crossings to the weakest points. Or, is electricity lingo- the path of least resistance. That makes apprehension even easier.
There remains things like going around the border security. Boating around at the Pacific ocean and Gulf of Mexico. Again, we can't eradicate every boating facility on the coasts. Still, going this path is both numerically limited and easily tracked and shut down. Flying them in remains an open possibility with similar problems. Flying thousands of human trafficking planes would quickly be identified and blocked. Flying commercial would require paperwork. Phony docs are possible, some might even work. Still, it would be foolish to say someone forged papers so we need to just quit using them.
And of course, we need to have a better domestic approach than opening the treasury to those who come. We must first accept reality to experience it.
I give you a link to a well researched and conceived assessment of Texas's border control efforts of the last 20 years.
It's chock full of facts and figures.
That's entirely true. I never disputed that. I have no (zero/zip/nada) argument or even dispute with that.
I agree.
There Are Three Kinds of Lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics (soory about bringing reality) Often attributed to Mark Twain? Benjamin Disraeli? St. Swithin? Eliza Gutch? Charles Dilke? Charles Stewart Parnell? Robert Giffen? Arthur James Balfour? Francis Bacon? Anonymous?
It was the original gaslight. Now the "fact check" has become more popular.
That's bullshit and that's the reason why we can't solve problems any more in this country.
Agreed. Well that and simply giving up. You actually believe we should give up on border security. That is the worst "solution". (it may give your TDS some comfort)
Somewhere on this board I had a poster (and I'm not making this up) argue the more illegals the better it was for the community. He has all the stats reliably fed to the flame of his gaslight. He had the links. Official sounding names and convincing big numbers with good spelling. Maybe an official seal on the page.
It was all BS (as in BullShit).
The reality is if they are the net positive those activist groups claim, every place in the country would be aggressively wooing them.
Wooooops
Yep, as Martha's Vineyard can tell you rat-quick....BullShit.
They simply get to be too much very quickly. Mayor Adams? Can I get a witness?
Those claims with their glossy stats and color photos are the intersection of GasLight and BullShit.
Worse, your hopes for a save are even worse that you had hoped for. States (Texas qualifies) have limited available means to protect the border. It is the federal gov't responsibility.
The open borders crowd even use the courts to their advantage-
Obama administration sues Arizona over immigration law-
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration on Tuesday sued Arizona over the state’s strict new immigration law, attempting to wrestle back control over the issue but infuriating Republicans who said the border required more security.
The lawsuit is part of a broader approach by President Barack Obama to deal with the 10.8 million illegal immigrants believed to be in the country, arguing that immigration is the responsibility of the federal government not each state.
“Seeking to address the issue through a patchwork of state laws will only create more problems than it solves,” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, said in a statement.
The legal action, filed while Congress was on a week-long break, is a political gamble by the administration as a Pew Research Center poll showed 59 percent of people approve of the Arizona crackdown.
Can states be as effective as the federal gov't? No. But they can be better than nothing. It's then up to the administration to be better than nothing....
I absolutely believe that illegal immigration needs to be addressed.
We’ve got to stop the politics and try something different and keep trying until we bring it under control.
Mexico has to agree to help us out
The narrowest part of Mexico is about 90-120 Miles wide. Pay Mexico to allow the U.S. to setup the tightest border crossing anywhere. That width is manageable.
It’s in our best interest and Mexico’s best interest and Mexico makes money off of the enterprise . We help keep illegal drugs and people out of Mexico.
This will significantly reduce the number trying to cross the US southern border. When we catch illegals on the southern border we immediately turn them over to Mexico for handling.
We do 90% of the work. Mexico can do 10%.
We use the U.S. Coast guard off both coasts of Mexico. Won’t be perfect but better than nothing
Post by EPIC Sir Tinley on May 23, 2023 8:35:52 GMT -8
The bussing of illegals has worked "Build the wall" hasn't been a sentiment often heard in South Side Chicago.
But someone held a sign calling for the barrier, while other residents shouted, "Close the border" and the like, during a community meeting in South Shore about a former high school potentially getting turned into a facility for immigrants lacking permanent legal status.
The bussing of migrants from border states to big cities has been an enormous political success for Republicans seeking to focus attention on President Joe Biden's policies that have failed to stop -- indeed, affirmatively encouraged -- a massive surge of illegal immigration.
It has made the border an issue in places far removed from the border.
It has forced Democratic mayors to admit, implicitly and explicitly, that migrants are a burden on public services and taxpayers.
It has stoked tensions between Democrats at the state and municipal levels on the one hand and the White House on the other over resources and border policy.
That's not bad for the price of some bus tickets.
Outgoing Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot declared a state of emergency when 8,000 migrants arrived from Texas since August. Chicago is a city of 2.7 million. The influx represents about .29% of the population.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams has said his city "is being destroyed by the migrant crisis." Roughly 60,000 migrants have arrived since the spring of 2022 on buses from Texas and under their own power. New York is one of the greatest cities in the world with a population of more than 8 million and already has hundreds of thousands of immigrants who entered the country illegally living in it.
The mayor of Washington, D.C., Muriel Bowser, (unsuccessfully) called on the Pentagon to help with handling newly arriving migrants last year.
All of these places are "sanctuary cities." There's NIMBYism, and then there's self-righteously declaring that you want more of something and, when it shows up at your doorstep, crying foul.
Sanctuary cities begging for a respite from illegal immigration is a little like a nuclear-free zone in the 1980s petitioning to become the site for Minuteman missiles.
If no plan survives first contact with the enemy, evidently no sanctuary city can survive any exposure to the real-world consequences of Joe Biden's border crisis.
It used to be that it was only immigration hawks, presumed to be hardhearted and ill-intentioned, who talked of the costs of illegal immigration. Migrants need housing, education and medical care, among other public services -- all of which are expensive and drain resources from other priorities. If this can be ignored when it is some other jurisdiction bearing the costs, it becomes undeniable when it is your own city struggling to make it work.
Estimates are that caring for the new migrants is going to cost New York City about $3 billion next year. An advisor to Eric Adams told Politico, as the publication paraphrased it, "most New Yorkers would rather see investments in schools, libraries and other city services than billions more spent to help the newcomers."
Understandably.
Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has called Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's bussing policy "inhumane." By what standard? A couple of million immigrants have illegally entered the country since Biden became president. Should they all stay in the border states? Why shouldn't big cities receive their share? Some of migrants would show up -- and have shown up -- in the big cities anyway. Should those migrants be blocked and sent back to Arizona and Texas?
Migrants, by the way, are volunteering to go on the buses because they want to travel to the cities in question.
The ire of Democratic mayors and governors would be best directed at the author of this mess, President Biden. Eric Adams has been willing to go there, saying that Biden has "failed" the city on immigration.
Actually, he's failed the entire country, something that might not be as obvious if blue cities were shielded from the effects of his de facto open border.
Post by EPIC Sir Tinley on May 30, 2023 3:31:06 GMT -8
Foreign Interference? How Non-Citizens Are Voting in American Elections
>You probably know the [National Voter Registration Act] as "Motor Voter." It is the federal requirement that requires state motor vehicle offices to offer voter registration and the ability to update your address.
>Sounds convenient? Now, we have data showing one of the side effects of Motor Voter is to put non-citizens onto American voter rolls.
?[W]e have collected extensive records of non-citizens asking to be removed from the voter rolls. Sometimes those records reveal how the foreign citizen was registered to vote, and the Motor Voter process represents the vast majority of cases.
>Chicago officials provided registration records where some foreign nationals even checked "NO" to the question of whether the person is a United States citizen, and were still registered.
>The Pennsylvania State Department admitted that due to what election officials referred to as a "glitch" that they had been accidentally registering foreign nationals to vote for two decades. They have been fighting for over five years to conceal details, including the number of foreign nationals the Commonwealth registered to vote by mistake.
>The reports from Maricopa County and Chicago are not an inventory of every non-citizen vote, but only those who informed election officials they were not American citizens. So, the catalog of confessed non-citizens is almost certainly just the tip of the iceberg.
>What can be done about non-citizens registering to vote?
>Congress can solve the problem by allowing states to validate citizenship effectively. This could be as easy as providing a passport, birth certificate or other evidence of being an American at the time of voter registration.
>Another easy fix is for Congress to add citizenship to the National Voter Registration Act's reasonable voter list maintenance requirements for states. Motor Voter does not put the same obligation for states to keep voter rolls free from non-citizens as it does, for example, dead voters.
This month marks the 30th anniversary of President Bill Clinton signing the National Voter Registration Act into law. You probably know the law as "Motor Voter." It is the federal requirement that requires state motor vehicle offices to offer voter registration and the ability to update your address.
Sounds convenient? Now, we have data showing one of the side effects of Motor Voter is to put non-citizens onto American voter rolls.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation, of which I am president, has been examining Motor Voter at 30; the good and the bad.
On one hand, the law has greatly increased the transparency in our elections. The law requires that all voter list maintenance records be available for public inspection. When elections are conducted with transparency, we trust the process more regardless of which candidate wins.
Additionally, Motor Voter requires states to have a reasonable program to remove registrants who have moved out of state or have passed away. There is no other obligation for election officials to have clean rolls.
On the downside, Motor Voter has led to foreign nationals who are not US citizens getting registered to vote, and documents prove it.
We know this because we have collected extensive records of non-citizens asking to be removed from the voter rolls. Sometimes those records reveal how the foreign citizen was registered to vote, and the Motor Voter process represents the vast majority of cases.
According to election records from Maricopa County, Arizona, 222 foreign nationals were removed from the county voter registration list since 2015. One of these individuals was registered for 27 years. That is 13 federal elections.
Some of the 222 foreigners on the voter rolls were also voting. Nine individuals are recorded casting 12 ballots across 4 federal elections.
Chicago, not surprisingly, has similar problems. Chicago election records show 394 foreigners were cancelled from the rolls after they asked to be. Of course, too many of them voted.
Chicago officials provided registration records where some foreign nationals even checked "NO" to the question of whether the person is a United States citizen, and were still registered.
The Pennsylvania State Department admitted that due to what election officials referred to as a "glitch" that they had been accidentally registering foreign nationals to vote for two decades. They have been fighting for over five years to conceal details, including the number of foreign nationals the Commonwealth registered to vote by mistake.
It is not always a plot, either. The process can be as simple as a foreign national checking the wrong box or signing the wrong form handed to them by a government employee – sometimes they cannot fully understand the language.
The reports from Maricopa County and Chicago are not an inventory of every non-citizen vote, but only those who informed election officials they were not American citizens. So, the catalog of confessed non-citizens is almost certainly just the tip of the iceberg.
Foreign nationals contact election officials to be removed from the voter roll when they are in the process of naturalizing to become a U.S. citizen. The naturalization process requires foreign nationals to answer if they have been registered to vote. If they lie about this easily verifiable question, they scuttle their naturalization. Worse, they risk outright deportation. Unfortunately, self-confessions represent the primary documents demonstrating the problem.
Nobody has a single database of citizens or foreigners that can be used for election administration -- not even the federal government. The Department of Homeland Security has a database of foreigners who have touched the immigration process, such as student visa holders, asylum seekers, green card applicants. But federal officials have failed to provide meaningful access to state election officials.
What can be done about non-citizens registering to vote?
Congress can solve the problem by allowing states to validate citizenship effectively. This could be as easy as providing a passport, birth certificate or other evidence of being an American at the time of voter registration.
Another easy fix is for Congress to add citizenship to the National Voter Registration Act's reasonable voter list maintenance requirements for states. Motor Voter does not put the same obligation for states to keep voter rolls free from non-citizens as it does, for example, dead voters.
We have learned a great deal about Motor Voter over the last three decades. The law profoundly changed American elections, yet it is showing signs of wear. It's time to modernize it.
J. Christian Adams is the President of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a former Justice Department attorney, and current commissioner on the United States Commission for Civil Rights.