PDA

View Full Version : Discussion On The Politics of Immigration Reform (Comprehensive Or Otherwise)



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11

gs1968
06-04-2013, 02:07 PM
A small procedural victory but still a victory (for people who follow the procedural aspects of legislation). It appears like there will be no need for a cloture vote for the initial motion to proceed on S.744 which does save some time. Otherwise if a cloture has to be filed first it might be another week before meaningful action and would be unnecessary as clearly there is enough votes in the Senate to at least start the debate if not pass the legislation

http://www.redstate.com/2013/06/04/mitch-mcconnell-goes-all-in-for-reidschumer-amnesty/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

chengisk
06-04-2013, 03:28 PM
Apart from the political drama, all I understand is that: "Obama/Democratic party is holding Legal Immigration improvements hostage for the Latino votes"

But then you are also aware that the proposed CIR would not have come about without the latino votes. Cheers!

qesehmk
06-04-2013, 03:43 PM
Without CIR there was precisely ZERO talk of any EB reform. This is a hard fact that there is no pressure group - no lobbying when it comes to EB reform. Tech companies are kind of sympathetic but the truth is - they too like the wage suppression.

So those of you who really want EB reform happen - you better align with CIR. Because other than CIR there is ZERO chance of EB reform. Here is my dollar on the table for anybody who wants to bet otherwise on this one. And this offer is valid for next 5 years.


Apart from the political drama, all I understand is that: "Obama/Democratic party is holding Legal Immigration improvements hostage for the Latino votes"

immitime
06-04-2013, 04:24 PM
I believe you know already same sex ammendment not attached. without amnesty there is going to be no bill as obama and senate democratic leadership are doing this whole exercise to appease latinos and to get future voters for generations.

Republicans (far right ones) wanted no immigration bills at all. Democrats on the other hand wanted only CIR and nothing else.

I am not sure whether you followed the visa re-capture bill and HR 3012, how they just died , there was no amnesty .

I am personally involved in 3012, putting both money and time in effort., i was so fed up that I thought i would rather live with EAD as its extremely frustrating to get anything done in washington.

I have followed the last years drama and still convinced that these politicians do not want to do any stuff on immigration side, they just want the issue to solve in future! get the lobby money every year. Also aware that same sex marriage is not included at present. But The President said without that option he may not sign the bill. No expectations this time.

Ramsen
06-04-2013, 04:36 PM
Without CIR there was precisely ZERO talk of any EB reform. This is a hard fact that there is no pressure group - no lobbying when it comes to EB reform. Tech companies are kind of sympathetic but the truth is - they too like the wage suppression.

So those of you who really want EB reform happen - you better align with CIR. Because other than CIR there is ZERO chance of EB reform. Here is my dollar on the table for anybody who wants to bet otherwise on this one. And this offer is valid for next 5 years.


Whenever immigration bill is debated companies wanted almost unlimited H1b and green card with zero requirements. Labor unions want protection for American workers. You cannot combine both. So congress is saying in a nice way that all of your requirements will be satisfied in coming CIR. Anytime companies and labor unions come up with agreement legal immigration bill will be passed . Otherwise wait for successful CIR

delguy
06-04-2013, 08:10 PM
Also aware that same sex marriage is not included at present. But The President said without that option he may not sign the bill. No expectations this time.

President did not said this. On the contrary he said that not everyone is going to get everything and that includes him, dems and republicans. He clearly said that it is going to be a compromise.

indiani
06-04-2013, 08:14 PM
Without CIR there was precisely ZERO talk of any EB reform. This is a hard fact that there is no pressure group - no lobbying when it comes to EB reform. Tech companies are kind of sympathetic but the truth is - they too like the wage suppression.

So those of you who really want EB reform happen - you better align with CIR. Because other than CIR there is ZERO chance of EB reform. Here is my dollar on the table for anybody who wants to bet otherwise on this one. And this offer is valid for next 5 years.

Agree with Q,
as long as obama is in office and senate has democratic leader or any democrat in office, they will veto any bill which doesn't have citizenship for almost 11 million.
Republicans have slim chance of getting house+senate+WH even in 2016.
CIR has about 25% chance of passing but thats the only hope for anyone who need legislative change to obtain GC.
when we were dealing with HR 3012 even though none of the democratic leaders or the WH voiced their opposition; harry reid tabled it (rather threw in garbage can) and so did countless hours of precious time and some money of many who lobbied including me went to waste.

indiani
06-04-2013, 08:22 PM
Obama is sincere in getting CIR done and so are the democrats; its the republicans who are playing politics.
some who want to be national players like Rubio , and veteran national players like Mccain are OK with it but most of them especially in house of representative are going to vote NO.

here is the one of the scenarios where it can pass:

Boehner gets pressue from Rubio/ carl rove and other republican establishment and future presdidential aspirees that without CIR they will have zero chances of winning WH in 2016; then Boehner along with Judicial committee (not sure who could convince Goodlatte) will introduce a bill on the House floor which will pass with democratic majority and some republicans getting on board (hispanic causes and republicans from border states with huge hispanic polulations)

Jonty Rhodes
06-04-2013, 11:30 PM
Obama is sincere in getting CIR done and so are the democrats; its the republicans who are playing politics.
some who want to be national players like Rubio , and veteran national players like Mccain are OK with it but most of them especially in house of representative are going to vote NO.

here is the one of the scenarios where it can pass:

Boehner gets pressue from Rubio/ carl rove and other republican establishment and future presdidential aspirees that without CIR they will have zero chances of winning WH in 2016; then Boehner along with Judicial committee (not sure who could convince Goodlatte) will introduce a bill on the House floor which will pass with democratic majority and some republicans getting on board (hispanic causes and republicans from border states with huge hispanic polulations)

Just out of curiosity, how many Republican votes will be needed in the House to pass the CIR provided all the Democrat House Representatives vote for it? I see that there are 201 Democrat and 233 Republican Representatives in the House. Does the House need 2/3 majority like Senate or only 50% majority would be required to pass it? Obviously, there are big ifs and buts before it makes it to the House floor and in which form, but just asking a hypothetical question.

indiani
06-04-2013, 11:37 PM
Just out of curiosity, how many Republican votes will be needed in the House to pass the CIR provided all the Democrat House Representatives vote for it? I see that there are 201 Democrat and 233 Republican Representatives in the House. Does the House need 2/3 majority like Senate or only 50% majority would be required to pass it? Obviously, there are big ifs and buts before it makes it to the House floor and in which form, but just asking a hypothetical question.

if there is no filibuster senate needs 50 votes as VP can vote in a tie.
house needs just over 50% votes
By the way even if 10 % of democrats vote NO, still there is good chance if you find approx 40 republicans, including 4 in house gang of 8.

vizcard
06-05-2013, 08:45 AM
By the way even if 10 % of democrats vote NO, still there is good chance if you find approx 40 republicans, including 4 in house gang of 8.

I agree but that's assuming a comprehensive House Bill will have a path to citizenship in it. There's no way a House Bill will be liberal enough to get House democrats to vote yes. The contrary will most likely be true. The Bill will be conservative, some republicans (particularly those from blue states) will vote no, some democrats (from red states) will vote yes and that Bill will get through the House.

vizcard
06-05-2013, 08:49 AM
Obama is sincere in getting CIR done and so are the democrats; its the republicans who are playing politics.
some who want to be national players like Rubio , and veteran national players like Mccain are OK with it but most of them especially in house of representative are going to vote NO.

here is the one of the scenarios where it can pass:

Boehner gets pressue from Rubio/ carl rove and other republican establishment and future presdidential aspirees that without CIR they will have zero chances of winning WH in 2016; then Boehner along with Judicial committee (not sure who could convince Goodlatte) will introduce a bill on the House floor which will pass with democratic majority and some republicans getting on board (hispanic causes and republicans from border states with huge hispanic polulations)

I don't think its just the Republicans playing politics. The Democrats have said "hell no" to anything without a path to citizenship. If they truly wanted to pass reform, then they need to be open to other options. I'm not defending republicans coz I think they are a bunch of idiots but they make some fair points related to Border Security triggers.

gs1968
06-05-2013, 10:50 AM
Sen.Marco Rubio is all over the place with what he is saying.A couple of links for consideration

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/john-cornyn-immigration-92246.html#ixzz2VLFihaRl

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/05/wonkbook-the-immigration-bill-is-moving-right/

Instead of teaming with the G8 to move this Bill along he is working with Sen.Cornyn?

Jonty Rhodes
06-05-2013, 11:08 AM
if there is no filibuster senate needs 50 votes as VP can vote in a tie.
house needs just over 50% votes
By the way even if 10 % of democrats vote NO, still there is good chance if you find approx 40 republicans, including 4 in house gang of 8.

Thanks for the reply.

indiani
06-05-2013, 11:15 AM
I don't think its just the Republicans playing politics. The Democrats have said "hell no" to anything without a path to citizenship. If they truly wanted to pass reform, then they need to be open to other options. I'm not defending republicans coz I think they are a bunch of idiots but they make some fair points related to Border Security triggers.

I agree with what you said, in fact democrats are the one who held all legal immigration bills hostage for 1 years.

What i meant to say was that the democrats are in favor of CIR in the CURRENT form.

Could they just drop the citizenship issue and pass bill with just GC to illegals and within 10 years pass another bill granting citizenship?
Of course they can but politically it doesn't make sense to them.

indiani
06-05-2013, 11:17 AM
Sen.Marco Rubio is all over the place with what he is saying.A couple of links for consideration

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/john-cornyn-immigration-92246.html#ixzz2VLFihaRl

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/05/wonkbook-the-immigration-bill-is-moving-right/

Instead of teaming with the G8 to move this Bill along he is working with Sen.Cornyn?

marco is definitely all over the place and confused, but if there is one single person in republican party who tried more to appease talk radio and conservatives is him, he is tea party darling.
I personally met him once , he seems to be very smeart guy and pragmatic

bieber
06-05-2013, 11:27 AM
Tea party is not happy with Rubio over CIR, he no longer gets that support. he is being played by Democrats, without Rubio name there is no credibility to this bill.

kkruna
06-05-2013, 12:32 PM
marco is definitely all over the place and confused, but if there is one single person in republican party who tried more to appease talk radio and conservatives is him, he is tea party darling.
I personally met him once , he seems to be very smeart guy and pragmatic

he is not confused. He is just ensuring to keep the initiative and not be "out-conservatived" by some other conservative.

indiani
06-05-2013, 12:36 PM
he is not confused. He is just ensuring to keep the initiative and not be "out-conservatived" by some other conservative.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/path-citizenship-highly-unlikely-pass-house-rep-tom-160539373.html

Tom price on CIR

gs1968
06-05-2013, 01:42 PM
Keeping up with the negative slant of news reports today

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/house-gop-immigration-resistance/2013/06/05/id/508190

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/06/house-talks-on-immigration-reform-near-collapse/

Jonty Rhodes
06-05-2013, 02:35 PM
Keeping up with the negative slant of news reports today

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/house-gop-immigration-resistance/2013/06/05/id/508190

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/06/house-talks-on-immigration-reform-near-collapse/

I understand that without Democrats there would not be a CIR but if this bill fails, I would blame Democrats as much as I would blame Republicans. I agree with Republicans on this one. I don't think the Health Care System in its current avatar would be able to take the burden of giving Government health care benefits to millions of illegals who will be legalized, not especially once the Obama Care will be implemented despite its being called as "Universal Health Care".

Obamacare is a terrible idea resulting from great and noble intentions. I can tell you this with some authority, because being a physician, we have already started to bear the brunt of it, in terms of decreased reimbursements, punishing physicians and hospitals financially for all-cause re-admissions within 30 days (If your patient comes with pneumonia, you treat them in the hospital and discharge them. In next 10 days, he falls and fractures his leg and comes back for fracture repair. That is considered a "Re-admission within 30 days and a fault of the physician. Yes, it is that stupid) and what not. I can go on and on about it.

The Democratic notion that since they are paying taxes, they should be getting benefits, is absolutely ridiculous. I am a legal immigrant from last 8.5 years in USA, first on F1 and then on H1B, and have been paying Medicare taxes since last 8 years, and still not eligible for government health care benefits and I am sure, just like me, you all are. Providing a path to citizenship is controversial enough and now Democrats want health care benefits on that which Republicans won't accept. Republicans are stubborn idiots but Democrats are not behind in their stubbornness either.

vizcard
06-05-2013, 02:49 PM
I understand that without Democrats there would not be a CIR but if this bill fails, I would blame Democrats as much as I would blame Republicans. I agree with Republicans on this one. I don't think the Health Care System in its current avatar would be able to take the burden of giving Government health care benefits to millions of illegals who will be legalized, not especially once the Obama Care will be implemented despite its being called as "Universal Health Care".

Obamacare is a terrible idea resulting from great and noble intentions. I can tell you this with some authority, because being a physician, we have already started to bear the brunt of it, in terms of decreased reimbursements, punishing physicians and hospitals financially for all-cause re-admissions within 30 days (If your patient comes with pneumonia, you treat them in the hospital and discharge them. In next 10 days, he falls and fractures his leg and comes back for fracture repair. That is considered a "Re-admission within 30 days and a fault of the physician. Yes, it is that stupid) and what not. I can go on and on about it.

The Democratic notion that since they are paying taxes, they should be getting benefits, is absolutely ridiculous. I am a legal immigrant from last 8.5 years in USA, first on F1 and then on H1B, and have been paying Medicare taxes since last 8 years, and still not eligible for government health care benefits and I am sure, just like me, you all are. Providing a path to citizenship is controversial enough and now Democrats want health care benefits on that which Republicans won't accept. Republicans are stubborn idiots but Democrats are not behind in their stubbornness either.

Totally agree. I've been in the that boat for 14 yrs now and probably paid $100K in FICA taxes over that period.

The Gang of 8 said no federal aid but obamacare I think is supposed to be a state program. The SJC agreed that it would only obamacare would only be available for medical emergencies but I'm not sure how you manage that.

rupen86
06-05-2013, 03:04 PM
Keeping up with the negative slant of news reports today

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/house-gop-immigration-resistance/2013/06/05/id/508190

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/06/house-talks-on-immigration-reform-near-collapse/

abcnews is pretty serious news which means that "Comprehensive" in the house is dead and they would proceed through piecemeal approach. They are not going to take senate version either. I do not know if they would be able to go to conference committee after passing couple of bills.

qesehmk
06-05-2013, 03:06 PM
gs - this probably is a positive news because it talks about benefit eligibility vs citizenship. Almost indicating that at least some core republicans are ok with citizenship.

I think dems will make a show about not yielding on this one but finally will yield.

90% of politics is posturing. So my feeling is that eventually dems will give up on this one and republicans will have a victory to show to their constituents.


Keeping up with the negative slant of news reports today

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/house-gop-immigration-resistance/2013/06/05/id/508190

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/06/house-talks-on-immigration-reform-near-collapse/

Jonty Rhodes
06-05-2013, 03:19 PM
gs - this probably is a positive news because it talks about benefit eligibility vs citizenship. Almost indicating that at least some core republicans are ok with citizenship.

I think dems will make a show about not yielding on this one but finally will yield.

90% of politics is posturing. So my feeling is that eventually dems will give up on this one and republicans will have a victory to show to their constituents.

Q, I hope what you wrote comes true and wish that this is just the political posturing. Politics is about compromise, and that is what the President has made it clear on multiple occasions in the past. I just hope, his own party follows it when it comes to controversial provisions or amendments in CIR. Just like Senator Leahy gave up on including LGBT provision in CIR in the broader interest of the survival of the bill, I hope House Democrats give up on the health care benefits for legalized illegals in trade for getting path to citizenship, especially when the legalized illegals are going to eventually get the government health care benefits, after a certain lag period.

immitime
06-05-2013, 03:22 PM
Obama is sincere in getting CIR done and so are the democrats; its the republicans who are playing politics.
some who want to be national players like Rubio , and veteran national players like Mccain are OK with it but most of them especially in house of representative are going to vote NO.

here is the one of the scenarios where it can pass:

Boehner gets pressue from Rubio/ carl rove and other republican establishment and future presdidential aspirees that without CIR they will have zero chances of winning WH in 2016; then Boehner along with Judicial committee (not sure who could convince Goodlatte) will introduce a bill on the House floor which will pass with democratic majority and some republicans getting on board (hispanic causes and republicans from border states with huge hispanic polulations)

I wish If the same sincerity he shows to the Legal tax paying immigrants!!! He is making the Legal immigrants as political bargaining chip due to inaction from his side. He could have done an executive order to take out family members from EB count, or another order also for visa recapture. (like he done for Dreamers before the election just for Votes only)
So nobody is sincere.. Lip is saying one and the politics is saying another one and inbetween there is lobbyists and their interests. Never ever believe a politican anywhere in the world. Again the issue is THEY DO NOT WANT TO FIX IMMIGRATION. WHICHEVER PARTY THEY BELONG. They want this to be an issue forever! Democrats are main hindrance for any immigration, Republicans secondary to that only, at least they support Legal immigration. Except Guncle and his chelas!

srimurthy
06-05-2013, 03:35 PM
I agree with what you said, in fact democrats are the one who held all legal immigration bills hostage for 1 years.

What i meant to say was that the democrats are in favor of CIR in the CURRENT form.

Could they just drop the citizenship issue and pass bill with just GC to illegals and within 10 years pass another bill granting citizenship?
Of course they can but politically it doesn't make sense to them.

Does not getting a GC mean they are anyway eligible to apply for Citizenship after 5 years as per the current law? So how come we need another deviation to grant the Citizenship faster?
Doesn't a path to GC automatically convert as a path to Citizenship for all these illegals? I fail to understand some of the reasonings.

indiani
06-05-2013, 03:47 PM
I understand that without Democrats there would not be a CIR but if this bill fails, I would blame Democrats as much as I would blame Republicans. I agree with Republicans on this one. I don't think the Health Care System in its current avatar would be able to take the burden of giving Government health care benefits to millions of illegals who will be legalized, not especially once the Obama Care will be implemented despite its being called as "Universal Health Care".

Obamacare is a terrible idea resulting from great and noble intentions. I can tell you this with some authority, because being a physician, we have already started to bear the brunt of it, in terms of decreased reimbursements, punishing physicians and hospitals financially for all-cause re-admissions within 30 days (If your patient comes with pneumonia, you treat them in the hospital and discharge them. In next 10 days, he falls and fractures his leg and comes back for fracture repair. That is considered a "Re-admission within 30 days and a fault of the physician. Yes, it is that stupid) and what not. I can go on and on about it.

The Democratic notion that since they are paying taxes, they should be getting benefits, is absolutely ridiculous. I am a legal immigrant from last 8.5 years in USA, first on F1 and then on H1B, and have been paying Medicare taxes since last 8 years, and still not eligible for government health care benefits and I am sure, just like me, you all are. Providing a path to citizenship is controversial enough and now Democrats want health care benefits on that which Republicans won't accept. Republicans are stubborn idiots but Democrats are not behind in their stubbornness either.

Jonty,

you add few more years of bonded labor as a doctor in USA and you will end up like me, much more cynical and frankly fed up with the whole system.

Dems are like communist party in India, their rhetoric is "you rich folks need to help out working class folks" , but reality is "we are the WORKING class" and the so called working class are really WELFARE class (we as workers have to take care of their welfare) ,

i dont know how your schedule is right now but I work almost 30days + 8 nights, with the hope that I can live in this country someday without the fear of being deported just b'cos somehow if you can't put up with the abuse of your employer and want to leave the job and can't find another one right away you become illegal next day and have to be looking out for ICE to show up at your door step, (as you know it takes months to join another).

indiani
06-05-2013, 03:50 PM
Does not getting a GC mean they are anyway eligible to apply for Citizenship after 5 years as per the current law? So how come we need another deviation to grant the Citizenship faster?
Doesn't a path to GC automatically convert as a path to Citizenship for all these illegals? I fail to understand some of the reasonings.

Dems want to make bill far more favorable to current illegals with the hope that CIR won't pass and hillary can use it as one of the campagn issues to become President in 2016.

But unfortunately there aren't many moderates left in the country anymore, both extremes.

I my previous post I meant hostage for 10 years

qesehmk
06-05-2013, 04:04 PM
indiani - i think the 2016 dem candidate will approach this topic from position of strength whatever be the outcome of the CIR. If Dems didn't want this to pass then why would they bring it at all and that too 4 years prior to next election?

The fact is every president and his party want some key accomplishments when in power.
Kennedy - moon and cuban crisis
Johnson - Civil rights
Carter - Energy independence (but it failed clearly!)
Reagan - Fall of communism
Clinton - Healthcare (failed)
Bush Jr - Education (failed), CIR (failed), National Security and war (politically succeeded but otherwise failed), defense modernization (succeeded)

For Obama - healthcare is already a plus one, likely economic revival is going to be a long term achievement and he wants to add CIR to his legacy to top it off.

So overall Dems absolutely want this. They are only posturing on various issues to ensure that citizenship clause and "Comprehensiveness" of the reform is untouched. Everything else is negotiable. But not these two things.




Dems want to make bill far more favorable to current illegals with the hope that CIR won't pass and hillary can use it as one of the campagn issues to become President in 2016.

srimurthy
06-05-2013, 04:04 PM
Jonty,

you add few more years of bonded labor as a doctor in USA and you will end up like me, much more cynical and frankly fed up with the whole system.

Dems are like communist party in India, their rhetoric is "you rich folks need to help out working class folks" , but reality is "we are the WORKING class" and the so called working class are really WELFARE class (we as workers have to take care of their welfare) ,

i dont know how your schedule is right now but I work almost 30days + 8 nights, with the hope that I can live in this country someday without the fear of being deported just b'cos somehow if you can't put up with the abuse of your employer and want to leave the job and can't find another one right away you become illegal next day and have to be looking out for ICE to show up at your door step, (as you know it takes months to join another).

I pity the doctors and the patients, because more than attending to the patients they are neck deep in the paper work to cover bases.

indiani
06-05-2013, 04:21 PM
indiani - i think the 2016 dem candidate will approach this topic from position of strength whatever be the outcome of the CIR. If Dems didn't want this to pass then why would they bring it at all and that too 4 years prior to next election?

The fact is every president and his party want some key accomplishments when in power.
Kennedy - moon and cuban crisis
Johnson - Civil rights
Carter - Energy independence (but it failed clearly!)
Reagan - Fall of communism
Clinton - Healthcare (failed)
Bush Jr - Education (failed), CIR (failed), National Security and war (politically succeeded but otherwise failed), defense modernization (succeeded)

For Obama - healthcare is already a plus one, likely economic revival is going to be a long term achievement and he wants to add CIR to his legacy to top it off.

So overall Dems absolutely want this. They are only posturing on various issues to ensure that citizenship clause and "Comprehensiveness" of the reform is untouched. Everything else is negotiable. But not these two things.

Q,
you made great points but like many on this forum, lets say If i was in obama's shoes and wanted to show more leadership, i would have focussed on house side and told the house Dems to compromise as long as citizenship clause is there and not to fight for unnecessary obamacare issue or other issues for all practical purposes don't make much difference for current illegals and here is why:

I took care of several hundreds of pts who are illegal without SSN, they are got excellent care, paid none to me or the hospital and went home and they are always welcome back in the hospital and so the current system is not so bad for them to unnecessarily fight for it.

here is what most people try to counter the above point by saying that somehow illegals have to wait until their condition becomes serious to come to ER., thats not true as even with cold anyone can go to ER but legals/citizens with private insurance don't go to ER b'cos of high co-pays.

Illegals and medicaid pts in the current system can see any specialist and get any procedure done (other than plastic surgery for cosmetic purposes) anyday without paying a dime.

So don't you think its kind of silly to ruin the chances by fighting for obamacare for illegals

rupen86
06-05-2013, 04:35 PM
Interesting analysis..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/05/do-republicans-want-immigration-reform/

qesehmk
06-05-2013, 05:27 PM
So don't you think its kind of silly to ruin the chances by fighting for obamacare for illegals
It absolutely is silly. And that's why I am saying it is not really fighting ... it is only posturing.

p.s. There is a small angle from which it is not as much silly otherwise. And that is universal coverage. In theory the president does want to be remembered as the guy who brought universal or near universal coverage. The moment you concede and create an opening in that strategy .... your whole strategy of universal coverage can fall apart. So that is the angle that can make it not so silly. However IMHO this point is a good bargaining chip to be used to gain something larger just like they did with gays and lesbians topic.

Jonty Rhodes
06-05-2013, 11:04 PM
Jonty,

you add few more years of bonded labor as a doctor in USA and you will end up like me, much more cynical and frankly fed up with the whole system.

Dems are like communist party in India, their rhetoric is "you rich folks need to help out working class folks" , but reality is "we are the WORKING class" and the so called working class are really WELFARE class (we as workers have to take care of their welfare) ,

i dont know how your schedule is right now but I work almost 30days + 8 nights, with the hope that I can live in this country someday without the fear of being deported just b'cos somehow if you can't put up with the abuse of your employer and want to leave the job and can't find another one right away you become illegal next day and have to be looking out for ICE to show up at your door step, (as you know it takes months to join another).

My schedule is not that bad but basically I am stuck in a place where there is no scope of doing any further research or publications or fellowship or advance your career. I want to do Gastroenterology Fellowship which is next to impossible to obtain without a green card. So basically, once I get a GC, I can move out of the place and then do something to boost my research and publish few papers and hopefully make it to the fellowship. But slowly, that desire is fading away for 2 reasons. a) I applied to fellowship several times already and every time, the reason for rejection from more than 90% of programs was that they don't sponsor visa and b) With passing time since my MD, I am growing old, getting far from my graduation year and with each passing yer, my profile gets weaker and weaker for fellowship without any research or publications.

But on the positive side, I am grateful to God, that there are many others who are in even worse position compared to me and still living positively. They give me hope. Hopefully, CIR will pass this year.

indiani
06-05-2013, 11:17 PM
My schedule is not that bad but basically I am stuck in a place where there is no scope of doing any further research or publications or fellowship or advance your career. I want to do Gastroenterology Fellowship which is next to impossible to obtain without a green card. So basically, once I get a GC, I can move out of the place and then do something to boost my research and publish few papers and hopefully make it to the fellowship. But slowly, that desire is fading away for 2 reasons. a) I applied to fellowship several times already and every time, the reason for rejection from more than 90% of programs was that they don't sponsor visa and b) With passing time since my MD, I am growing old, getting far from my graduation year and with each passing yer, my profile gets weaker and weaker for fellowship without any research or publications.

But on the positive side, I am grateful to God, that there are many others who are in even worse position compared to me and still living positively. They give me hope. Hopefully, CIR will pass this year.

almost all indian doctors on h-1 in this country more or less are in the same situation with exception of few, i know close friend of mine did GI fellowship on h-1 in SUNY where he did his residency.

for your second point, i am one of the few who don't believe in any invisible man in the sky (and i respect everyone who are believers), I think all the years of education should give us needed skills to cope with unusual circumstances we face.

I closely follow Q's forum (by far the best of all forums i have been to) to get really good feel of potential changes in PD movements and make plans in career and life .also it gives me a sense of support from so many fellows in the same boat and some who got GC but still contribute.

Jonty Rhodes
06-05-2013, 11:19 PM
I pity the doctors and the patients, because more than attending to the patients they are neck deep in the paper work to cover bases.

And with Obamacare, it is getting worse. Ask any physician for that matter and they will tell you how burdensome the paperwork has become. In fact, now I spend around 60-70% of time for paperwork (which includes writing and dictating notes, filling forms and calling insurance companies for petty reasons) and only 30-40% of time with patients, and it will get worse with new requirements. Now, we have documentation specialists who are rounding in the hospital every day. They review each and every patient chart and physician documentation. Then we inevitable get a call from them every day to document few more things so the hospital can get paid by Medicare/Medicaid since Medicare and Medicaid can deny reimbursement for unbelievably silly reasons. We call them Documentation Nazis :)

Jonty Rhodes
06-05-2013, 11:24 PM
almost all indian doctors on h-1 in this country more or less are in the same situation with exception of few, i know close friend of mine did GI fellowship on h-1 in SUNY where he did his residency.

for your second point, i am one of the few who don't believe in any invisible man in the sky (and i respect everyone who are believers), I think all the years of education should give us needed skills to cope with unusual circumstances we face.

I closely follow Q's forum (by far the best of all forums i have been to) to get really good feel of potential changes in PD movements and make plans in career and life .also it gives me a sense of support from so many fellows in the same boat and some who got GC but still contribute.

That's true. Almost, every Indian Doctor who is on H1 in US faces more or less a similar situation.

I know another one who did GI Fellowship like that on H1 in LSU, Shreveport but he did his residency there as well. But those kind of cases are not very common.

I agree that by far, this is the best forum and I keep a close eye on this one for predictions and calculations.

rupen86
06-06-2013, 08:40 AM
It absolutely is silly. And that's why I am saying it is not really fighting ... it is only posturing.

p.s. There is a small angle from which it is not as much silly otherwise. And that is universal coverage. In theory the president does want to be remembered as the guy who brought universal or near universal coverage. The moment you concede and create an opening in that strategy .... your whole strategy of universal coverage can fall apart. So that is the angle that can make it not so silly. However IMHO this point is a good bargaining chip to be used to gain something larger just like they did with gays and lesbians topic.

Labrador quits gang if 8. This is huge blow to house gang of 8 which is no longer gang of 8. Without him, I do not think they would be able to produce a bill.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/06/06/Rep-Raul-Labrador-quits-House-Gang-of-Eight/UPI-26921370503800/

rupen86
06-06-2013, 10:00 AM
Immigration reform in trouble..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/06/the-morning-plum-immigration-reform-may-be-in-trouble/

gs1968
06-06-2013, 10:13 AM
I know I brought up Sen.Rubio's conflicting positions yesterday but I am still confused as to what he is trying to do.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/rubio-says-he-is-open-to-separate-immigration-bills/article/2531279?custom_click=rss

gcq
06-06-2013, 10:18 AM
Labrador quits gang if 8. This is huge blow to house gang of 8 which is no longer gang of 8. Without him, I do not think they would be able to produce a bill.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/06/06/Rep-Raul-Labrador-quits-House-Gang-of-Eight/UPI-26921370503800/
Depends. If house fails to come up with a bill, it may turn out to be good for CIR. In that case they will have to move forward with Senate bill at some point.

gs1968
06-06-2013, 10:49 AM
Depends. If house fails to come up with a bill, it may turn out to be good for CIR. In that case they will have to move forward with Senate bill at some point.

That would be the ideal scenario but I feel it is very unlikely.I felt that the DREAM beneficiaries would at least be one area of agreement between the two chambers but the House just passed an amendment to the Homeland security appropriations bill (HR 2217) depriving the DHS of funds to implement the Executive Order of President Obama for DACA. This will likely not be in the final version if the Senate also passes it but the vote count showed an overwhelming majority of Republicans voting no.I find this very hard to believe in the current environment but if an amendment like this gets passed so convincingly then there is a huge challenge for more controversial items like guest workers/citizenship pathway etc.

http://americasvoiceonline.org/blog/breaking-steve-king-amendment-gutting-daca-and-other-protections-coming-up-on-house-floor/

PS-The amendment was proposed by Rep.Steve King

gs1968
06-06-2013, 10:58 AM
Labrador quits gang if 8. This is huge blow to house gang of 8 which is no longer gang of 8. Without him, I do not think they would be able to produce a bill.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/06/06/Rep-Raul-Labrador-quits-House-Gang-of-Eight/UPI-26921370503800/

This from Rep.Gutierrez after Labrador's departure

"I guess they will stop calling us the gang of eight, now. I am hoping they start calling us the Magnificent Seven."

http://gutierrez.house.gov/press-release/gutierrez-pleased-house-immigration-group-moving-forward-praises-rep-labradors

indiani
06-06-2013, 11:22 AM
Depends. If house fails to come up with a bill, it may turn out to be good for CIR. In that case they will have to move forward with Senate bill at some point.

The house Doesn't have to take the senate bill, it may but its not guaranteed

gs1968
06-06-2013, 11:52 AM
This from ThinkProgress

"One indication of where the House stands on immigration is House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-VA) vote today. Cantor voted yes on King’s amendment, even though he announced support for the DREAM Act (in theory) in February.

Mr.Boehner is doing the same Kabuki dance like Mr.Rubio in the Senate

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/350347/boehner-house-hesitant-immigration-lindsey-grudnicki?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

gs1968
06-06-2013, 12:02 PM
I just got this on twitter

1st Senate floor debate on the #immigration bill will be Fri. 1st vote on procedural motion, Tues, 2:15-2nd vote @ 4pm Tues

srimurthy
06-06-2013, 12:48 PM
Q,
you made great points but like many on this forum, lets say If i was in obama's shoes and wanted to show more leadership, i would have focussed on house side and told the house Dems to compromise as long as citizenship clause is there and not to fight for unnecessary obamacare issue or other issues for all practical purposes don't make much difference for current illegals and here is why:

I took care of several hundreds of pts who are illegal without SSN, they are got excellent care, paid none to me or the hospital and went home and they are always welcome back in the hospital and so the current system is not so bad for them to unnecessarily fight for it.

here is what most people try to counter the above point by saying that somehow illegals have to wait until their condition becomes serious to come to ER., thats not true as even with cold anyone can go to ER but legals/citizens with private insurance don't go to ER b'cos of high co-pays.

Illegals and medicaid pts in the current system can see any specialist and get any procedure done (other than plastic surgery for cosmetic purposes) anyday without paying a dime.

So don't you think its kind of silly to ruin the chances by fighting for obamacare for illegals

hmm... is there a way I can be legal and get same medical benefits are they all are gettings? :-) Wanted to cut down on the health insurence costs.

gs1968
06-06-2013, 12:51 PM
Senator Reid just filed cloture on the motion to proceed on the immigration bill -- on the floor next week

indiani
06-06-2013, 01:15 PM
hmm... is there a way I can be legal and get same medical benefits are they all are gettings? :-) Wanted to cut down on the health insurence costs.

you are entitled to same ER access like all illegals do. The only difference, if you give your SSN or your name in ER and you don't pay bills it can ruin your credit history.

As illegals don't have either SSN and don't care about credit history, they can freely access without having to pay bills,
in fact all women (who are here illegally) who are pregnant have 100% costs covered by state of FL, no need to have private insurance or worry about co-pays.

seahawks2012
06-06-2013, 01:23 PM
you are entitled to same ER access like all illegals do. The only difference, if you give your SSN or your name in ER and you don't pay bills it can ruin your credit history.

As illegals don't have either SSN and don't care about credit history, they can freely access without having to pay bills,
in fact all women (who are here illegally) who are pregnant have 100% costs covered by state of FL, no need to have private insurance or worry about co-pays.

That's actually enlightening. Thanks for the insight. What this means is that any argument about cost to state for medical expenses is no longer valid (w.r.t. legalizing the illegals). In fact, by legalizing this invisible cost would in fact be reduced. Of course other expenses may still apply.

seahawks2012
06-06-2013, 01:26 PM
Senator Reid just filed cloture on the motion to proceed on the immigration bill -- on the floor next week

From Senate's website:

"Friday, Jun 07, 2013
9:30 a.m.: Convene and resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S.744, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill."

indiani
06-06-2013, 01:35 PM
That's actually enlightening. Thanks for the insight. What this means is that any argument about cost to state for medical expenses is no longer valid (w.r.t. legalizing the illegals). In fact, by legalizing this invisible cost would in fact be reduced. Of course other expenses may still apply.

Lawmakers know all these stuff but everything they say and do is based on politics

rupen86
06-06-2013, 02:08 PM
This from ThinkProgress

"One indication of where the House stands on immigration is House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-VA) vote today. Cantor voted yes on King’s amendment, even though he announced support for the DREAM Act (in theory) in February.

Mr.Boehner is doing the same Kabuki dance like Mr.Rubio in the Senate

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/350347/boehner-house-hesitant-immigration-lindsey-grudnicki?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

He is saying that is he is unsure how many bills house can do, whether they have the bandwidth to do it and that house won't take up the senate bill and that senate is wasting their time on the CIR since they are not going to take it up.

Pedro Gonzales
06-06-2013, 03:23 PM
Well, we'll find out soon enough as the Senate calls their bluff. I think there will be significant pressure on them to take up the Senate bill if they don't have one of their own by then. My guess is that the Senate bill comes to the floor soon after the August recess. I also think it passes with a majority of democrat and about 20 to 30 Republican votes.

Still, let's take one step at a time. The floor of the Senate first.

rupen86
06-06-2013, 03:47 PM
Immigration reform in trouble..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/06/the-morning-plum-immigration-reform-may-be-in-trouble/

Another article along the similar line.
http://www.businessinsider.com/immigration-reform-senate-house-marco-rubio-raul-labrador-2013-6

rupen86
06-06-2013, 04:06 PM
From Oh Law firm,

06/06/2013: Sen. John Cornyn Reveals his Proposed Compromised Amendment to Senate CIR 2013, S. 744

Sen. Cornyn is one of the Republican Senators who objected to the S. 744, as amended, at the end of the markup sessions in the Senate Judiciary Committee. He now reveals his proposed amendment which is likely to be introduced on the Senate floor next week. This will be one of the important compromise amendments which will be introduced to expand the number of Senators to support the S. 744. Please read the following outline and news report
Outline
Statement
Sen. Cornyn is the Republican Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee.

immitime
06-06-2013, 04:39 PM
From Oh Law firm,

06/06/2013: Sen. John Cornyn Reveals his Proposed Compromised Amendment to Senate CIR 2013, S. 744

Sen. Cornyn is one of the Republican Senators who objected to the S. 744, as amended, at the end of the markup sessions in the Senate Judiciary Committee. He now reveals his proposed amendment which is likely to be introduced on the Senate floor next week. This will be one of the important compromise amendments which will be introduced to expand the number of Senators to support the S. 744. Please read the following outline and news report
Outline
Statement
Sen. Cornyn is the Republican Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee.

NEWS: Sen Reid filing a cloture motion S. 744 on Friday June 7th 2013

The following one might be a reminder for all of us.. to know about /cloture motion.

cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/cloture.htm

gs1968
06-06-2013, 07:14 PM
NEWS: Sen Reid filing a cloture motion S. 744 on Friday June 7th 2013

The following one might be a reminder for all of us.. to know about /cloture motion.

cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/cloture.htm

To immitime
The cloture motion is not on the Bill itself but merely on the motion to proceed to consideration of the Bill.60 votes are needed to overcome any holds although this seems unlikely. In fact when Mr.McConnell did not object,many observers felt that this additional step was not necessary but I guess Mr.Reid followed his usual playbook. If the cloture prevails then there will be a few weeks of debate followed by amendments.There will be a second cloture motion to close off debate at some point when everybody has had their say followed by the actual vote on the Bill for which only a simple majority is needed

abcx13
06-06-2013, 08:56 PM
To immitime
The cloture motion is not on the Bill itself but merely on the motion to proceed to consideration of the Bill.60 votes are needed to overcome any holds although this seems unlikely. In fact when Mr.McConnell did not object,many observers felt that this additional step was not necessary but I guess Mr.Reid followed his usual playbook. If the cloture prevails then there will be a few weeks of debate followed by amendments.There will be a second cloture motion to close off debate at some point when everybody has had their say followed by the actual vote on the Bill for which only a simple majority is needed

You underestimate a certain Mr. Jeff Sessions of the great state of Alabama.

gs1968
06-07-2013, 01:03 PM
To abcx13
Not to mention 200+ of his clones in the House!

A different perspective from an die-hard conservative columnist

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/304143-immigration-reform-still-alive

seahawks2012
06-07-2013, 01:36 PM
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/304143-immigration-reform-still-alive

That actually makes lot of sense:

"The key in the House will be to make any amnesty or citizenship path wholly contingent on border security enforcement, specifying that the process cannot begin until the border is sealed. This means that immigration reform, Republican-style, is a border security bill with amnesty and citizenship thrown in as an incentive and a reward for compliance. In that context, it will probably clear the House.
The Senate and the White House may rail against the Republican alternative, but they have no real choice but to pass it and sign it."

rupen86
06-07-2013, 01:37 PM
To abcx13
Not to mention 200+ of his clones in the House!

A different perspective from an die-hard conservative columnist

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/304143-immigration-reform-still-alive

It is a good analysis.

seahawks2012
06-07-2013, 02:29 PM
Is there a good article that explains why stricter border control conflicts with the amnesty proposal?

qesehmk
06-07-2013, 02:47 PM
I don't know any article but the reason it conflicts with CIR because of 2 reasons.
A) Stricter (border control) is vague and full (border control) is unattainable. Thus either only serves as a mokey wrench in any immigration reform talk.
B) Under Obama border is much better controlled than it was under Bush. Homeland security statistics prove that. So any talk of border control is mostly political and in opposition to any immigration reform effort.


Is there a good article that explains why stricter border control conflicts with the amnesty proposal?

qesehmk
06-07-2013, 02:48 PM
Funny that the article starts with the word posturing! That is a good sign!

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/304143-immigration-reform-still-alive

gs1968
06-07-2013, 03:18 PM
I like today's mood on this forum better than yesterday.To make everybody smile-here are a few of Rep King's famous Quotes for weekend reading-

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/199988/30-of-congressman-steve-kings-greatest-quotes/

indiani
06-07-2013, 08:30 PM
Generic reply from Rubio

Dear Dr......,



Thank you for writing to me to express your concerns regarding the ongoing debate about immigration reform. I understand this is an important issue and I appreciate hearing your thoughts.



As the immigration proposal comes to the Senate floor for debate and amendments, I am hopeful that we can strengthen enforcement and security mechanisms in the legislation while still offering an arduous, but fair path forward for illegal immigrants currently in the United States. However, if enforcement and security is not strengthened during the amendment process, I will not support the immigration bill before the Senate. Thank you for your comments and concerns, I will certainly keep them in mind as immigration reform measures move forward and inform you of my approach to immigration reform following the Senate floor debate.



It is an honor and a privilege to serve as your United States Senator. I appreciate you offering your opinion on this important issue. If I can ever be of assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.



Sincerely,

Marco Rubio
United States Senator

indiani
06-07-2013, 08:31 PM
Generic reply from Rubio

Dear Dr......,



Thank you for writing to me to express your concerns regarding the ongoing debate about immigration reform. I understand this is an important issue and I appreciate hearing your thoughts.



As the immigration proposal comes to the Senate floor for debate and amendments, I am hopeful that we can strengthen enforcement and security mechanisms in the legislation while still offering an arduous, but fair path forward for illegal immigrants currently in the United States. However, if enforcement and security is not strengthened during the amendment process, I will not support the immigration bill before the Senate. Thank you for your comments and concerns, I will certainly keep them in mind as immigration reform measures move forward and inform you of my approach to immigration reform following the Senate floor debate.



It is an honor and a privilege to serve as your United States Senator. I appreciate you offering your opinion on this important issue. If I can ever be of assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.



Sincerely,

Marco Rubio
United States Senator

gs1968
06-08-2013, 09:41 AM
Some perspective from the House

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/08/diaz-balart-on-immigration-reform-theres-pushback-on-everything/

The withdrawal of Rep Labrador is unfortunate as he is the only member of the Group of 8 that sits on the Judiciary committee.However the others have been at it much longer and have higher stakes (more skin in the game according to Rep Carter) and may come out with a better package.

rupen86
06-08-2013, 11:52 AM
Some perspective from the House

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/08/diaz-balart-on-immigration-reform-theres-pushback-on-everything/

The withdrawal of Rep Labrador is unfortunate as he is the only member of the Group of 8 that sits on the Judiciary committee.However the others have been at it much longer and have higher stakes (more skin in the game according to Rep Carter) and may come out with a better package.

I do not know what to make out from the interview. It seems little pessimistic or as in the end as he says cautiously optimistic. I do not get clear directions from that whether it is comprehensive vs piecemeal or whether it is path to citizenship or whether it is H1B. The questions were corrected and pointed but answers were not.

ROCK72
06-08-2013, 02:05 PM
Some hope...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324069104578529390183002414.html#p roject%3DPOLCOUNT0607_pg%26articleTabs%3Dinteracti ve

gs1968
06-09-2013, 10:27 AM
Positive news but again she is from NH and is already feeling the heat for her gun-control vote

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57588391/ayotte-announces-critical-gop-support-for-senate-immigration-bill/

gs1968
06-10-2013, 08:55 AM
The House is clearly not rushing to immigration reform any time soon as we probably know already.The only positive is that the House Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing (not a mark-up) of the SAFE Act this week sponsored by Rep.Gowdy which increases interior enforcement of immigration laws in local communities. This is part of the piecemeal Bills being worked on by the Judiciary Committee

Chairman Goodlatte wrote an op-ed in the Roanoke Times yesterday and the link is below

http://www.roanoke.com/opinion/pointcounterpoint/1974354-12/take-the-time-to-methodically-craft-immigration-legislation.html

"We plan to build upon this work to build consensus on these important issues in the weeks and months ahead. This process of regular order allows every representative to fully vet the issues and provides the opportunity to have the voices of the 6th Congressional District and folks across the nation heard."

kiddo9256
06-10-2013, 09:39 AM
gs/others - is there a consolidated list of 'S.744-what happens in next 1-2 weeks on senate floor' information ? senate judiciary website was such place during judiciary process.
i read somewhere that they were going to vote starting tomorrow. i understand this is one of many (up/down, amendment,final bill) votes and hence the question. tx.

bieber
06-10-2013, 12:05 PM
I don't know any article but the reason it conflicts with CIR because of 2 reasons.
A) Stricter (border control) is vague and full (border control) is unattainable. Thus either only serves as a mokey wrench in any immigration reform talk.
B) Under Obama border is much better controlled than it was under Bush. Homeland security statistics prove that. So any talk of border control is mostly political and in opposition to any immigration reform effort.

Q
It may very well be true that border control is better with this administration. But admission of unattainability defeats the purpose of whole immigration reform. It's hard for americans to believe that superpower can not control it's borders regardeless of this reform while their phone records, emails being scanned every minute. If border indeed cannot be controlled 100 or 90% then isn't it true that the country is not ready for this. I hope the this debate results into a practical and possible method to control the border and legalize who is inside already

vizcard
06-10-2013, 12:44 PM
Q
It may very well be true that border control is better with this administration. But admission of unattainability defeats the purpose of whole immigration reform. It's hard for americans to believe that superpower can not control it's borders regardeless of this reform while their phone records, emails being scanned every minute. If border indeed cannot be controlled 100 or 90% then isn't it true that the country is not ready for this. I hope the this debate results into a practical and possible method to control the border and legalize who is inside already

the issue is not so much about ability but more about practicality. I'm sure you could get the border 100% secure if you throw enough money at it but the question is- is it worth it? there's the law of diminishing returns when federal funds could be used elsewhere. The GOP already has issues with govt spending and the debt ceiling.

By the way, I'm all for border security and everify and exit/entry and all that but there's got to be some common sense in the process.

bieber
06-10-2013, 01:30 PM
the issue is not so much about ability but more about practicality. I'm sure you could get the border 100% secure if you throw enough money at it but the question is- is it worth it? there's the law of diminishing returns when federal funds could be used elsewhere. The GOP already has issues with govt spending and the debt ceiling.

By the way, I'm all for border security and everify and exit/entry and all that but there's got to be some common sense in the process.

Viz
It's required by constitution that borders are protected in the sovereign nation. National security is probably the only item where majority has similar views

gs1968
06-10-2013, 03:39 PM
gs/others - is there a consolidated list of 'S.744-what happens in next 1-2 weeks on senate floor' information ? senate judiciary website was such place during judiciary process.
i read somewhere that they were going to vote starting tomorrow. i understand this is one of many (up/down, amendment,final bill) votes and hence the question. tx.
The cloture vote is tomorrow after which the Majority & Minority leaders will start filling up the amendment tree. Unlike the judiciary committee the amendments will be in the few dozens rather than the hundreds as seen in the Committee but the amendments will be complex and will need debate on their own.

I am confused by this news item below which contradicts my earlier "deliberate pace" news story. But this is coming from the leadership or their aides while the other story was from Rep.Goodlatte -Are they not talking to each other?

http://www.newsmax.com/politics/house-gop-immigration-reform/2013/06/10/id/509060

Another story with slightly more detail

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2013/06/10/house-speaker-john-boehner-aims-to-have-immigration-reform-bill-by-summer/

gs1968
06-10-2013, 04:17 PM
gs/others - is there a consolidated list of 'S.744-what happens in next 1-2 weeks on senate floor' information ? senate judiciary website was such place during judiciary process.
i read somewhere that they were going to vote starting tomorrow. i understand this is one of many (up/down, amendment,final bill) votes and hence the question. tx.

I found this link-hope this helps

http://immigrationimpact.com/2013/06/10/procedural-path-of-the-senate-immigration-bill/

indiani
06-10-2013, 06:10 PM
I hate to dissappoint with my prediction but I highly suspect that House judiciary committe will kill the bill

rupen86
06-10-2013, 06:21 PM
The cloture vote is tomorrow after which the Majority & Minority leaders will start filling up the amendment tree. Unlike the judiciary committee the amendments will be in the few dozens rather than the hundreds as seen in the Committee but the amendments will be complex and will need debate on their own.

I am confused by this news item below which contradicts my earlier "deliberate pace" news story. But this is coming from the leadership or their aides while the other story was from Rep.Goodlatte -Are they not talking to each other?

http://www.newsmax.com/politics/house-gop-immigration-reform/2013/06/10/id/509060

Another story with slightly more detail

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2013/06/10/house-speaker-john-boehner-aims-to-have-immigration-reform-bill-by-summer/

This is quite positive and ambitious plan that Boehner has put. I am surprised that it has not received wide coverage.

idiotic
06-10-2013, 06:44 PM
"Mr. Sessions goes to Washington"

After the senate closing remarks are done(more than a hour ago), he started talking and is still talking for more than a hour. Almost reminded me of "Mr. smith goes to washington" :)

qesehmk
06-10-2013, 09:37 PM
bieber - all of us wish that this debate results into something practical common sense and progressive actions. But i think the border control argument is there to throw the CIR off. I think all of us can figure out why total border control is unattainable - cost vs returns. Physical wall would cost $30B and will be best control. Electronic walls are already in place and are not the best control.

Now the immigrants actually come in and help in wage suppression - work hard - do jobs that most people won't do. In Arizona we can pay somebody to take care of our lawns. How many people in NY can afford that? Anyway ... the but point is - total border control is not only expensive from implementation perspective - it will also negatively affect economy. That's why no US administration (dems or reps) is going to enforce border control and neither they should (IMHO). It's stupid. It's not India Pak border where terrorists are sneaking in. These are just simple people looking for a better life. And it works better for everybody. Only politicians make a big deal about it when they sense that can get them elected.

Sorry for little speech. I respect the rights of legal folks. But I also believe that all immigration is generally good. And that border control is a legal correctness that could harm a greater good.


Q
It may very well be true that border control is better with this administration. But admission of unattainability defeats the purpose of whole immigration reform. It's hard for americans to believe that superpower can not control it's borders regardeless of this reform while their phone records, emails being scanned every minute. If border indeed cannot be controlled 100 or 90% then isn't it true that the country is not ready for this. I hope the this debate results into a practical and possible method to control the border and legalize who is inside already

rupen86
06-11-2013, 08:39 AM
Good Analysis..Immigration reform back from the brink..

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/immigration-reform-back-from-the-brink.html

bieber
06-11-2013, 10:56 AM
bieber - all of us wish that this debate results into something practical common sense and progressive actions. But i think the border control argument is there to throw the CIR off. I think all of us can figure out why total border control is unattainable - cost vs returns. Physical wall would cost $30B and will be best control. Electronic walls are already in place and are not the best control.

Now the immigrants actually come in and help in wage suppression - work hard - do jobs that most people won't do. In Arizona we can pay somebody to take care of our lawns. How many people in NY can afford that? Anyway ... the but point is - total border control is not only expensive from implementation perspective - it will also negatively affect economy. That's why no US administration (dems or reps) is going to enforce border control and neither they should (IMHO). It's stupid. It's not India Pak border where terrorists are sneaking in. These are just simple people looking for a better life. And it works better for everybody. Only politicians make a big deal about it when they sense that can get them elected.

Sorry for little speech. I respect the rights of legal folks. But I also believe that all immigration is generally good. And that border control is a legal correctness that could harm a greater good.

If infact 30B number is accurate, then cost/benefit analysis is piece of cake. Current administration ran 100B+ MONTHLY deficits for last 50+ months, so that cost is nothing in big picture. Regarding Ind/Pak border type scenario, there is evidence that such crossings (with wrong intentions) are already happening from south and there are groups in that country who r helping

gs1968
06-11-2013, 11:55 AM
Good Analysis..Immigration reform back from the brink..

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/immigration-reform-back-from-the-brink.html

Thanks for the link rupen.However Mr.Boehner's interview this morning is not very convincing with a lot of vague replies/stuttering/stammering etc.Here is the transcript and please go to pages 3/4

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/transcript-exclusive-interview-house-speaker-john-boehner-nsa/story?id=19370792#.UbdWa5wUz6N

rupen86
06-11-2013, 12:18 PM
Thanks for the link rupen.However Mr.Boehner's interview this morning is not very convincing with a lot of vague replies/stuttering/stammering etc.Here is the transcript and please go to pages 3/4

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/transcript-exclusive-interview-house-speaker-john-boehner-nsa/story?id=19370792#.UbdWa5wUz6N

I went through the link. Yes, answers are vague. But they are supposed to be. Questions were well pointed and direct. But he did not want to answer them in direct way. He did not want to say that he would bring a bill to the floor even if majority of republicans are opposed to it. The positive thing is he did not promise that he would not do that. He again said he expected some bill by end of the month which again is a good thing.

indiani
06-11-2013, 12:27 PM
I went through the link. Yes, answers are vague. But they are supposed to be. Questions were well pointed and direct. But he did not want to answer them in direct way. He did not want to say that he would bring a bill to the floor even if majority of republicans are opposed to it. The positive thing is he did not promise that he would not do that. He again said he expected some bill by end of the month which again is a good thing.

Paul Ryan will be key in putting some pressure to bring the bill to vote in house as he wants to be in the race for 2016.

If the bill is brought to vote in house it will pass.

1. points to consider how soon the house bill will pass.
2. how different will it be from senate bill.

No one knows answer to these two

girish989
06-11-2013, 02:05 PM
Paul Ryan will be key in putting some pressure to bring the bill to vote in house as he wants to be in the race for 2016.

If the bill is brought to vote in house it will pass.

1. points to consider how soon the house bill will pass.
2. how different will it be from senate bill.

No one knows answer to these two

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-passes-key-senate-test-92586.html

indiani
06-11-2013, 02:13 PM
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-passes-key-senate-test-92586.html

almost everyone agrees that it will pass senate latest by July.

Margin is what everyone is counting on.

simple majority will embolden house leadership to delay and hope to kill eventually.

70+ will keep immense pressure to bring it to vote.

Today's vote is just an OK to proceed to debate and bring to vote in 3-4 weeks ( not necessarily an approval of bill by everyone who voted yea )

seahawks2012
06-11-2013, 02:20 PM
"But i think the border control argument is there to throw the CIR off. I think all of us can figure out why total border control is unattainable - cost vs returns."

I most certainly disagree with that perspective.
If you start with the perspective of "border control is unattainable" then you have to agree "eradication of illegal immigration" is also "unattainable".
If it is not totally possible to stop future illegal immigration, then US would have to file for Amnesty bills every other decade to solve the issues being talked about in the CIR.

From a common sense point of view, if you are talking about total amnesty then you need to stop/stem the flow that generates the illegal immigration.
I do not know enough about border control measures to give a stronger perspective about cost/benefit & practical/ideal for different measures.
But, I find it hard to believe that there is not good set of stronger border control measures that cannot be added to stem the future illegal immigration flow.

idiotic
06-11-2013, 02:39 PM
almost everyone agrees that it will pass senate latest by July.


Ted Cruz (one who sponsered 5 poison pill amendments in committee) announced on senate floor just now that the bill has enough precooked votes to pass the senate at the end of this month.

He said it will crash and burn in the house and asked house members to take a look at this amendments :)

Game is clear now as it is affirmed by an insider.

rupen86
06-11-2013, 02:44 PM
I went through the link. Yes, answers are vague. But they are supposed to be. Questions were well pointed and direct. But he did not want to answer them in direct way. He did not want to say that he would bring a bill to the floor even if majority of republicans are opposed to it. The positive thing is he did not promise that he would not do that. He again said he expected some bill by end of the month which again is a good thing.

This link confirms this analysis that interview was actually positive.

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/immigration-reform-kicks-off-means/story?id=19374650#.Ubd6QdiWS-U

rupen86
06-11-2013, 02:59 PM
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-passes-key-senate-test-92586.html

The negative thing here was that Sen. Mark Kirk voted against it who was considered moderate to vote in favor of the bill.

gs1968
06-11-2013, 08:00 PM
Sen Leahy is not giving up

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/patrick-leahy-gay-couples-amendment-92612.html

qesehmk
06-11-2013, 08:08 PM
That's ok. When you will reach a position of power whatever field you are working - you will realize that even if you are the topmost guy - you just can never have 100% control over anything. It's always a compromise.

Same goes with immigration, crime, childbirth-deaths, rapes and what not. If you have a 100% control over something then that thing can't be important enough for the world.

So the moment anybody talks about 100% border control as a precondition to CIR - that person/organization is opposed to CIR - just that they dont' want to say so publicly.

I most certainly disagree with that perspective.
If you start with the perspective of "border control is unattainable" then you have to agree "eradication of illegal immigration" is also "unattainable".
If it is not totally possible to stop future illegal immigration, then US would have to file for Amnesty bills every other decade to solve the issues being talked about in the CIR.

From a common sense point of view, if you are talking about total amnesty then you need to stop/stem the flow that generates the illegal immigration.
I do not know enough about border control measures to give a stronger perspective about cost/benefit & practical/ideal for different measures.
But, I find it hard to believe that there is not good set of stronger border control measures that cannot be added to stem the future illegal immigration flow.

qesehmk
06-11-2013, 08:20 PM
LoL!! Watch out he is acting anti-CIR. GLBT is such a minor issue in the grand scheme ... but a sure shot no no for republicans.
Sen Leahy is not giving up

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/patrick-leahy-gay-couples-amendment-92612.html

indiani
06-11-2013, 08:27 PM
That's ok. When you will reach a position of power whatever field you are working - you will realize that even if you are the topmost guy - you just can never have 100% control over anything. It's always a compromise.

Same goes with immigration, crime, childbirth-deaths, rapes and what not. If you have a 100% control over something then that thing can't be important enough for the world.

So the moment anybody talks about 100% border control as a precondition to CIR - that person/organization is opposed to CIR - just that they dont' want to say so publicly.

Q,
you made very good point. anytime we strive to do something we have to access what degree of success we want to achieve at what expense.

Republicans are saying stuff to appease their base at the same time didn't want to sound anti-immigrant.

No matter how much technology is advanced and how much money is spent , there never can be 100% success rate in something as complex as illegal immigration.

But I also want to add that republicans ( voters ) do not trust that WH will implement any serious border control measures , so republican voters like congress to have control over it.

indiani
06-11-2013, 08:32 PM
Q,

I disagree with you, just like we get frustrated when people think few tens of thousands of indians discrimiated and suffering for decades is not being taken seriously, gays will feel the same.

Leahy has done the right thing but almost everyone knows that the amendment will be defeated even by democrats.
( even Leahy knows that )

It is just symbolic on his part.

qesehmk
06-11-2013, 08:48 PM
I am all for GLBT. Just saying that - the provision just guarantees defeat in the house.
Q,

I disagree with you, just like we get frustrated when people think few tens of thousands of indians discrimiated and suffering for decades is not being taken seriously, gays will feel the same.

Leahy has done the right thing but almost everyone knows that the amendment will be defeated even by democrats.
( even Leahy knows that )

It is just symbolic on his part.

indiani
06-11-2013, 09:14 PM
I am all for GLBT. Just saying that - the provision just guarantees defeat in the house.

I got your point now and i agree completely if this amendment is included in final bill , CIR will never become law.

But Leahy as I mentioned before knows that even his democratic colleagues will vote down this amendment.

He is hoping for some political contributions from LGBT community for his next election..lol

rupen86
06-12-2013, 10:43 AM
From Oh Law firm,
06/12/2013: Sen. Grassley Supports the CIR Bill and Propose his Amendment #1195

It is very surprising that the Senator Grassley introduced his amendment S. AMDT 1195 with a statement that he supports the CIR bill and just amend RPI trigger provision as follows: (Purpose: To prohibit the granting of registered provisional immigrant status until the Secretary has maintained effective control of the borders for 6 months). On page 855, strike line 24 and all that follows through page 856, line 9, and insert the following:
"(1) PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS FOR REGISTERED PROVISIONAL IMMIGRANT STATUS.--Not earlier than the date upon which the Secretary has submitted to Congress a certification that the Secretary has maintained effective control of the Southern border for a period of not less 6 months, the Secretary may commence processing applications for registered provisional immigrant status pursuant to section 245B of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by section 2101 of this Act." This amendment will be voted today.
Very good!


Although it appears very positive and surprising that senator like Grassley will support the bill, this amendment is unlikely to pass.

immitime
06-12-2013, 10:50 AM
I got your point now and i agree completely if this amendment is included in final bill , CIR will never become law.

But Leahy as I mentioned before knows that even his democratic colleagues will vote down this amendment.

He is hoping for some political contributions from LGBT community for his next election..lol

But as per one of the statement from The President, he won't sign the bill without this provision and 11 million path to citizenship.. so anybody think he may Veto the bill without this provisions???

gs1968
06-12-2013, 11:56 AM
From Oh Law firm,
06/12/2013: Sen. Grassley Supports the CIR Bill and Propose his Amendment #1195

It is very surprising that the Senator Grassley introduced his amendment S. AMDT 1195 with a statement that he supports the CIR bill and just amend RPI trigger provision as follows: (Purpose: To prohibit the granting of registered provisional immigrant status until the Secretary has maintained effective control of the borders for 6 months). On page 855, strike line 24 and all that follows through page 856, line 9, and insert the following:
"(1) PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS FOR REGISTERED PROVISIONAL IMMIGRANT STATUS.--Not earlier than the date upon which the Secretary has submitted to Congress a certification that the Secretary has maintained effective control of the Southern border for a period of not less 6 months, the Secretary may commence processing applications for registered provisional immigrant status pursuant to section 245B of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by section 2101 of this Act." This amendment will be voted today.
Very good!


Although it appears very positive and surprising that senator like Grassley will support the bill, this amendment is unlikely to pass.

I read that too from Matthew Oh but I am unable to find any substantiation that he actually supports the Bill.It would be a great get for the Gof8 if they could bring him aboard as he would pull a lot of conservatives along.I did not see his floor speech but his printed remarks do not suggest support.

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/press_releases.cfm

delguy
06-12-2013, 12:33 PM
I heard the debate yesterday and I dont recall Grassley making any statement in support of the bill in current shape.


I read that too from Matthew Oh but I am unable to find any substantiation that he actually supports the Bill.It would be a great get for the Gof8 if they could bring him aboard as he would pull a lot of conservatives along.I did not see his floor speech but his printed remarks do not suggest support.

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/press_releases.cfm

delguy
06-12-2013, 12:34 PM
This is incorrect. President has not put any such condition regarding LGBT support in the bill.


But as per one of the statement from The President, he won't sign the bill without this provision and 11 million path to citizenship.. so anybody think he may Veto the bill without this provisions???

gs1968
06-12-2013, 12:50 PM
Interesting although it is still delaying the inevitable

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/jeff-sessions-first-immigration-vote-senate-92652.html

seahawks2012
06-12-2013, 01:03 PM
That's ok. When you will reach a position of power whatever field you are working - you will realize that even if you are the topmost guy - you just can never have 100% control over anything. It's always a compromise.

Same goes with immigration, crime, childbirth-deaths, rapes and what not. If you have a 100% control over something then that thing can't be important enough for the world.

So the moment anybody talks about 100% border control as a precondition to CIR - that person/organization is opposed to CIR - just that they dont' want to say so publicly.

I guess my point was not clear enough, I get that 100% is not possible. But, that should not be the justification for "doing nothing". There is always a middle/common/compromise ground. The debate is about what that middle ground is. It is safe to say the CIR bill is not strong enough on border provisions to even reach that common ground of agreement/compromise between both the parties. So, saying that any border provision amendment is going to be a non-starter is the antithesis of saying "100% is unattainable".

gcq
06-12-2013, 01:24 PM
Interesting although it is still delaying the inevitable

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/jeff-sessions-first-immigration-vote-senate-92652.html

Sessions confirmed he is putting the brakes on votes for now — although he indicated it’s more than one Republican senator doing so.


As if it is a surprise !

delguy
06-12-2013, 01:32 PM
The debate is restarted. Can be seen at:

http://www.senate.gov/floor/index.htm





As if it is a surprise !

qesehmk
06-12-2013, 01:37 PM
Of course. Middle ground is what they should be looking for. But I am afraid - and my point is that - those who want to derail the talks and CIR - talk about completely securing the borders as a precondition to CIR.


I guess my point was not clear enough, I get that 100% is not possible. But, that should not be the justification for "doing nothing". There is always a middle/common/compromise ground. The debate is about what that middle ground is. It is safe to say the CIR bill is not strong enough on border provisions to even reach that common ground of agreement/compromise between both the parties. So, saying that any border provision amendment is going to be a non-starter is the antithesis of saying "100% is unattainable".

gcq
06-12-2013, 01:45 PM
The debate is restarted. Can be seen at:

http://www.senate.gov/floor/index.htm
Sessions says "African Americans" can't get jobs so it should not proceed. A guy who cares for African Americans !
"Unemployment going up. There aren't enough jobs" typical arguments of an anti-immigrant.

delguy
06-12-2013, 02:25 PM
Sen Dean Heller (R) just spoke and seems to be in favor of bill. Good sign. He proposed few minor amendments but overwass appeared to be cool with current bill.

idiotic
06-12-2013, 02:43 PM
Sessions says "African Americans" can't get jobs so it should not proceed. A guy who cares for African Americans !
"Unemployment going up. There aren't enough jobs" typical arguments of an anti-immigrant.

Mr. Sessions == numbersusa.com

Their only goal is "Reduce immigration legal or illegal"

Even the republicancs who are against this acknowledged on senate floor that there is enough votes for the bill to pass Senate.

It is a defeat for people like Mr. Sessions in Senate.

House of Representatives is the real deal for CIR now.. They are under huge political pressure and will be forced to do something..

delguy
06-12-2013, 03:04 PM
I liked the way Sen McCain provided rebuttal for Sen Cornyn amendment. Sen Cornyn just cooked up an amendment that require billions of dollars in implementation but has no answers to where the money will come from for that. The way McCain and Schumer argued with him was music to ears.

Those who are interested in really improving the bill are providing specific amendments to specific issues whereas monkey wrench throwers are busy with vague amendments.

vizcard
06-12-2013, 03:06 PM
if you want a good laugh check this out.. idiots want to deport the Statue of Liberty because its an illegal alien

http://deportthestatue.us/

gcq
06-12-2013, 03:38 PM
Many GOP senator's feelings hurt. " I am not the guy who takes these lightly" ( Probably senator from Utah )

kkruna
06-12-2013, 03:44 PM
if you want a good laugh check this out.. idiots want to deport the Statue of Liberty because its an illegal alien

http://deportthestatue.us/

Take the vote on the page. It's actually the other way.

immitime
06-12-2013, 03:59 PM
Conservatives call on Boehner at Congress to stick with hastert rule. the rule dictates that no bill come to the floor without assurance that a majority of GOP members will vote for it.


http://blogs.rollcall.com/goppers/conservatives-call-on-boehner-to-stick-with-hastert-rule/

gs1968
06-12-2013, 07:32 PM
Another piecemeal Bill in the house by House Judiciary members for border security closely aligned with Sen Cornyn Amendment

http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2013/06/ted-poe-lamar-smith-bill-flores-propose-border-enforcement-crackdown-similar-to-cornyn-plan/

indiani
06-12-2013, 10:56 PM
Unless we see a bill that passes the house , rest is all speculation

gs1968
06-13-2013, 05:22 AM
Interesting development-I really think the endgame is near

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/house-immigration-reform-92695.html

vizcard
06-13-2013, 09:34 AM
Interesting development-I really think the endgame is near

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/house-immigration-reform-92695.html


We're so not even close to the end game. Its more like they are deciding the rules of the game before starting it.

Assuming it does go through the House, I'll bet there are so many points of contention with the Senate bill that conference will likely take as long as the House and Senate processes (2-3 months easy)
- border security (this itself is a cluster)
- H1Bs
- family based immigration/ points system
- benefits/fees
- pure number of immigrant workers - based on the tenuous compromises between the labor and business groups.

pdfeb09
06-13-2013, 10:14 AM
if you want a good laugh check this out.. idiots want to deport the Statue of Liberty because its an illegal alien

http://deportthestatue.us/

it is ridiculous by design ... it is hilarious, however.

geterdone
06-13-2013, 10:43 AM
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/305293-senate-rejects-border-security-amendment-to-immigration-bill

The vote was 57-43.

Question- if the final vote on the bill is also 57-43 (just an assumption) is that a fail since it did not get 60 or it just needs a simple majority?

gs1968
06-13-2013, 11:10 AM
We're so not even close to the end game. Its more like they are deciding the rules of the game before starting it.

Assuming it does go through the House, I'll bet there are so many points of contention with the Senate bill that conference will likely take as long as the House and Senate processes (2-3 months easy)
- border security (this itself is a cluster)
- H1Bs
- family based immigration/ points system
- benefits/fees
- pure number of immigrant workers - based on the tenuous compromises between the labor and business groups.

Sorry viz-just trying to pump everybody up.Anyway no further action till Monday

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/350971/reid-warns-weekend-vote-rama-jonathan-strong?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Personally I feel that the Go8 & Democrats got a little bit rattled by the vote count on the first vote and decided to cool things off and discuss more before the
next votes

In response to the 60 vote threshold question-After all amendments have been discussed and dispensed with, there will be a cloture vote to end debate which will need a 60 vote threshold.If that passes and cloture is invoked then a simple majority is all that is necessary for final passage.If the cloture fails-the Bill will most likely die unless debate is resumed again

girish989
06-13-2013, 11:15 AM
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/305293-senate-rejects-border-security-amendment-to-immigration-bill

The vote was 57-43.

Question- if the final vote on the bill is also 57-43 (just an assumption) is that a fail since it did not get 60 or it just needs a simple majority?

Only simple majority needed, that is why - even Ted Cruz says that bill will pass the senate.

jackbrown_890
06-13-2013, 12:13 PM
to table an amendment and final passage of the bill are different things,,
to table a motion requires 67 nays to not kill that motion,,
the bill's final passage (in senate) will require 60 votes to stop GOP (in this case) from using filibuster,,



http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/305293-senate-rejects-border-security-amendment-to-immigration-bill

The vote was 57-43.

Question- if the final vote on the bill is also 57-43 (just an assumption) is that a fail since it did not get 60 or it just needs a simple majority?

gs1968
06-13-2013, 03:45 PM
House conference on immigration

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/351012/house-gop-hold-special-conference-immigration-jonathan-strong

Why wait till July when we have all of June left?

idiotic
06-13-2013, 04:34 PM
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/305293-senate-rejects-border-security-amendment-to-immigration-bill

The vote was 57-43.

Question- if the final vote on the bill is also 57-43 (just an assumption) is that a fail since it did not get 60 or it just needs a simple majority?

Reid said yesterday on senate floor.

"60 votes on everything" is Mitch mcconnell rule :)

CIR as written has clearly 60+ votes but the republican amedments do not have 60 votes. Reps and Dems know this fact.. It will pass Senate for sure. Real fate for this bill is in house. If the bill passes with 70+ votes as sponsors are trying to get more on board then house will have no choice politically but to pass it with minor alterations..

rupen86
06-13-2013, 05:11 PM
House conference on immigration

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/351012/house-gop-hold-special-conference-immigration-jonathan-strong

Why wait till July when we have all of June left?

Goodlatte is holding conference on immigration anyway. So how is this going to be different?

idiotic
06-13-2013, 06:02 PM
House conference on immigration

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/351012/house-gop-hold-special-conference-immigration-jonathan-strong

Why wait till July when we have all of June left?

Indication that he is waiting for the final passed version of senate bill to start amending :)

they are not able to produce anything in a bipartisan way with support of all major groups like unions/chamber of commerce, etc...

vizcard
06-13-2013, 09:11 PM
Indication that he is waiting for the final passed version of senate bill to start amending :)

they are not able to produce anything in a bipartisan way with support of all major groups like unions/chamber of commerce, etc...

you are spot on

Jonty Rhodes
06-15-2013, 12:03 AM
We know that he is not the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree but this was amusing. It cracked me up. "Immigrants are more fertile" by Jeb Bush and the comments are even more hilarious.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/14/jeb-bush-arguing-for-immigration-reform-says-immigrants-more-fertile/?hpt=hp_t3

vizcard
06-15-2013, 10:54 PM
I moved a post by silverlining027 to the "Predictions and Calculations" thread on page 84 (http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showthread.php/1217-EB2-3-Predictions-(Rather-Calculations)-2013/page84)

rupen86
06-18-2013, 08:46 AM
It has been very quiet here from last few days. Here is the big story. House on its way to produce a bill as early as tomorrow.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/house-immigration-bill-92941.html

gs1968
06-18-2013, 10:00 AM
Two other big stories

http://washingtonexaminer.com/support-falling-in-polls-reid-announces-rush-to-pass-immigration-bill/article/2532058

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/john-boehner-immigration-92967.html

idiotic
06-18-2013, 05:11 PM
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/s744.pdf

CBO report.. -- Good News for supporters !! Bad news for opposers !!

gs1968
06-18-2013, 05:47 PM
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/s744.pdf

CBO report.. -- Good News for supporters !! Bad news for opposers !!

This was expected and I don't think it changes anybody's mind.The Republicans were not in favor of dynamic scoring which is exactly what the CBO report does.

idiotic
06-19-2013, 09:39 AM
This was expected and I don't think it changes anybody's mind.The Republicans were not in favor of dynamic scoring which is exactly what the CBO report does.

The report is better than even Schumer or any pro reform group was expecting. Bad CBO report would have meant tough road ahead in house. This report proved that there are no valid good arguments against CIR. We know the true intentions of the people who are against the reform(refer numbersusa/FAIR/etc). The report is not going to make a difference to them anyway but just will corner them more against their invalid arguments.

idiotic
06-19-2013, 10:01 AM
All NJ folks should contact Jeff Chiesa's office to request him to vote for passge of S.744.

Chiesa, Jeff - (R - NJ) Class II
1 RUSSELL COURTYARD WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3224
E-mail: Senator_Chiesa@Chiesa.Senate.gov

rupen86
06-19-2013, 10:14 AM
Senate Republicans on the cusp of buying in?

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0618/Immigration-reform-Senate-Republicans-on-the-cusp-of-buying-in-video/%28page%29/2

gs1968
06-19-2013, 02:37 PM
The report is better than even Schumer or any pro reform group was expecting. Bad CBO report would have meant tough road ahead in house. This report proved that there are no valid good arguments against CIR. We know the true intentions of the people who are against the reform(refer numbersusa/FAIR/etc). The report is not going to make a difference to them anyway but just will corner them more against their invalid arguments.

The report is already being twisted by different factions to suit their own agenda. Personally I cannot see how any individual or agency can predict the state of affairs 20 years from now with any degree of certainty

http://washingtonexaminer.com/corker-cbo-findings-make-the-case-for-greater-border-security/article/2532134?custom_click=rss

gs1968
06-19-2013, 02:39 PM
Senate Republicans on the cusp of buying in?

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0618/Immigration-reform-Senate-Republicans-on-the-cusp-of-buying-in-video/%28page%29/2

More conflicting news stories albeit from a right wing source

http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-aides-window-may-be-closing-on-gang-of-eight-bill/article/2532139?custom_click=rss

rupen86
06-19-2013, 04:00 PM
More conflicting news stories albeit from a right wing source

http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-aides-window-may-be-closing-on-gang-of-eight-bill/article/2532139?custom_click=rss

Analysis, partially looks correct. They seem to be negotiating on border security with Hoeven and Corker and abandoned Cornyn. Those 2 do not have same authority as Cornyn and are not expected to bring significant support with them. I believe, 70 looks a stretch now. It will get between 60 and 70.

gs1968
06-19-2013, 06:03 PM
Analysis, partially looks correct. They seem to be negotiating on border security with Hoeven and Corker and abandoned Cornyn. Those 2 do not have same authority as Cornyn and are not expected to bring significant support with them. I believe, 70 looks a stretch now. It will get between 60 and 70.

To rupen
This link substantiates your line of thought about the Hoeven-Corker amendment (Cornyn-lite?!)

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/cbo-border-security-93063.html

Vote tally most likely closer to 60 than 70 unless Democrats start agreeing to some Republican amendments. Even the most punitive and dumb Republican amendments are getting at least 35 GOP votes

triplet
06-19-2013, 07:02 PM
I am not sure 60 votes will be enough, if a democratic majority is being strong armed into compromising their ideal markers for the bill then imagine its fate as it makes its way to the House. I was quite optimistic about this bill but I think it is dying a slow death, quite frustrating. There might still be an outside chance but we can all agree that that's pretty slim. Disappointing.

immitime
06-20-2013, 11:02 AM
To rupen
This link substantiates your line of thought about the Hoeven-Corker amendment (Cornyn-lite?!)

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/cbo-border-security-93063.html

Vote tally most likely closer to 60 than 70 unless Democrats start agreeing to some Republican amendments. Even the most punitive and dumb Republican amendments are getting at least 35 GOP votes

Both the parties should do compromises and sacrifices... Why Democrats want to mix Illegal immigration with Legal immigration, that is the most dumbest thing in the world. Why they want everything comprehensive. Legals have been made hostages for their sefish needs the Votes.

I am sarccastic here. "Don't worry buddy, the undisputed Administration is preparing a comprehensive executive order if this ComB apprehensive immigration bill is not passed" as per reports on Feb 2013. If the current Administration have real leadership they will do executive order may be only for Illegals to give passport within three years.. No votes for Legals.. so all EBs (EB2 & EB3) will eternally wait in the Queue

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2013/02/16/dems-obama-doesnt-need-congress-for-immigration-reform-you-know-n1514143

idiotic
06-20-2013, 12:04 PM
Both the parties should do compromises and sacrifices... Why Democrats want to mix Illegal immigration with Legal immigration, that is the most dumbest thing in the world. Why they want everything comprehensive. Legals have been made hostages for their sefish needs the Votes.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2013/02/16/dems-obama-doesnt-need-congress-for-immigration-reform-you-know-n1514143

Just to add.. "Do not think republicans will let legal immigration to be reformed too". Best example is fate of HR3012 lat year. Grassley and others will not let anything through. Better support Gang of 8 in their effort to completely overhaul immigration.

immitime
06-20-2013, 12:35 PM
Just to add.. "Do not think republicans will let legal immigration to be reformed too". Best example is fate of HR3012 lat year. Grassley and others will not let anything through. Better support Gang of 8 in their effort to completely overhaul immigration.

You should brush up your info dear... HR 3012 case Grassley lifted the hold on the bill around July 2012, there are almost 5 months after that Why Sen.Reid don't want to file a cloture for HR 3012 at that time?? Democrats want Legals to be hostages for bargaining to give 11millions path to citizenship...HR 3012 was a republican bill. Grassley lifted the hold and Sen Reid, Schumer stalled it. Gang of 8 can only do something on the Senate but not in the House.

rupen86
06-20-2013, 01:21 PM
New Proposed amendment on border security could come as early as today.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-kirk-says-he-will-back-immigration-bill-if-security-tightened-20130620,0,2419766.story

idiotic
06-20-2013, 01:37 PM
You should brush up your info dear... HR 3012 case Grassley lifted the hold on the bill around July 2012, there are almost 5 months after that Why Sen.Reid don't want to file a cloture for HR 3012 at that time?? Democrats want Legals to be hostages for bargaining to give 11millions path to citizenship...HR 3012 was a republican bill. Grassley lifted the hold and Sen Reid, Schumer stalled it. Gang of 8 can only do something on the Senate but not in the House.

Please point me the link which states Grassley lifted the hold. If it was the case no cloture was required. If there was another unknown senator holding up that bill it would have been another republican called sessions..

Cloture is very expensive for Senate which will not be used unless it is really required. It is well known that democratic stratergy is to get every force behind one bill and push it through.

The real people who do not want anything getting done is reps..

abcx13
06-20-2013, 01:56 PM
I count the foll Republicans who would support:

4 of the Gang
Kelly Ayotte
John Hoeven
Bob Corker
Mark Kirk

Potentially Murkowski, Hatch, Susan Collins, Rob Portman?

NYT says this amendment might get 8 to 12 Republicans. I think that's excluding the Gang. So that might get you up to 70 in the Senate.

trackright
06-20-2013, 02:28 PM
New Hoeven/Corker border security amendment being discussed in the senate.

http://www.republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/floor-updates?View=agenda-day

Hope this helps gain more republican support.

gs1968
06-20-2013, 02:34 PM
I count the foll Republicans who would support:

4 of the Gang
Kelly Ayotte
John Hoeven
Bob Corker
Mark Kirk

Potentially Murkowski, Hatch, Susan Collins, Rob Portman?

NYT says this amendment might get 8 to 12 Republicans. I think that's excluding the Gang. So that might get you up to 70 in the Senate.

I just got this tweet

"Ds believe they will hold caucus together, and if Corker is correct that 15 Rs may vote aye, Senate could pass immigration with 69 votes"

It is interesting to see that the Democrats in the Judiciary Committee vehemently opposed the same provisions which they are now hailing. Unless they can agree to enforcement trigger before any form of legalization the Bill will most likely die in conference or never make it to conference at all.The current amendment is unlikely to be enough to placate the House

gs1968
06-20-2013, 03:02 PM
To Viz/abcx and others who enjoy the game of politics-I found this interesting

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/congress-still-not-a-fun-place-to-be-a-bill-20130620

If anything the GOP house caucus needs a new whip.Mr.Kevin McCarthy is losing vote after vote and embarrassing the Leadership

qesehmk
06-20-2013, 03:59 PM
Not a fan of McCain ... but this clip proves he still has some of the same character that once made him the darling of so many independents.

http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbc-news/52266310

rupen86
06-20-2013, 04:43 PM
New Hoeven/Corker border security amendment being discussed in the senate.

http://www.republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/floor-updates?View=agenda-day

Hope this helps gain more republican support.

Cornyn amendment is defeated.

idiotic
06-20-2013, 05:38 PM
Not a fan of McCain ... but this clip proves he still has some of the same character that once made him the darling of so many independents.

http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbc-news/52266310

You might want to watch the Schumer+Mccain vs Cronyn debate on floor.

For tamil friends, it would remind senthil goundamani banana joke :)

Schumer and Mcain repeatedly asking Cronyn the same question again and again (where is the money for amendments coming from) and Cronyn kept beating around the bush without answering it. Mccain got frustrated and told him "its simple first grade mathematics" :) Cronyn finally walked out of floor.

On a related note, Cornyn came today on senate floor couple of hours back saying" I just took a closer look at the bill.. where is the money for the new border security amendment going to come from?".. Its very clear his true intentions is to just kill the bill..

qesehmk
06-20-2013, 05:47 PM
It's amazing that cornyn is from texas (first state with minority majority) and yet so opposed to CIR. McCain on the other hand is from a state that is so anti immigrant and yet the old man is vehemently supporting the bill.
You might want to watch the Schumer+Mccain vs Cronyn debate on floor.

For tamil friends, it would remind senthil goundamani banana joke :)

Schumer and Mcain repeatedly asking Cronyn the same question again and again (where is the money for amendments coming from) and Cronyn kept beating around the bush without answering it. Mccain got frustrated and told him "its simple first grade mathematics" :) Cronyn finally walked out of floor.

On a related note, Cornyn came today on senate floor couple of hours back saying" I just took a closer look at the bill.. where is the money for the new border security amendment going to come from?".. Its very clear his true intentions is to just kill the bill..

idiotic
06-20-2013, 05:58 PM
It's amazing that cornyn is from texas (first state with minority majority) and yet so opposed to CIR. McCain on the other hand is from a state that is so anti immigrant and yet the old man is vehemently supporting the bill.

The answer is "Tea Party" I guess. They are the ones who is the source of all problems in Congress today. Most are afraid of them..

rupen86
06-20-2013, 06:31 PM
The answer is "Tea Party" I guess. They are the ones who is the source of all problems in Congress today. Most are afraid of them..

My feeling is that amendment that they are discussing is not quite different than what Cornyn was asking. I think they should have tried harder than abandoning Cornyn so easily.

idiotic
06-20-2013, 06:37 PM
My feeling is that amendment that they are discussing is not quite different than what Cornyn was asking. I think they should have tried harder than abandoning Cornyn so easily.

If you have watched the floor debates for the past few days and still think Cornyn is interested in improving the bill, good luck to you !!

abcx13
06-20-2013, 06:57 PM
My feeling is that amendment that they are discussing is not quite different than what Cornyn was asking. I think they should have tried harder than abandoning Cornyn so easily.

It is very diff! There is no trigger. At some level I see why a trigger is overly punitive if you think illegals should eventually be legalized and allowed to come out of the shadows (personally, I think GC is ok but no citizenship), but I also sympathize with the Republican POV that without a trigger, there is no incentive for the Democrats to actually reduce illegal immigration (particularly if you/they think that illegals, if and when legalized again, are more likely to vote Democratic). That said, apprehensions are at all times high with Obama so I think the Republican fear might be somewhat misplaced. If anything, I think Republicans like illegal immigration more because big biz likes it and Reps are beholden to big biz. Maybe that's why Republicans don't want to legalize - as long as they stay in the shadows, illegals can be exploited for the benefit of big biz.

abcx13
06-20-2013, 06:59 PM
If you have watched the floor debates for the past few days and still think Cornyn is interested in improving the bill, good luck to you !!

Not to comment on whether he supports the bill, both sides are horsing around. Schumer did complain about the cost at first, the CBO report that shows a surplus is just a smoke screen - it's still a bad use of capital (remember 40% of illegals are visa overstays). It's just that Democrats are willing to capitulate and waste the $30b on a dumb fence and border security because that's the only way to get some Reps on board and pass the bill.

idiotic
06-20-2013, 07:10 PM
Not to comment on whether he supports the bill, both sides are horsing around. Schumer did complain about the cost at first, the CBO report that shows a surplus is just a smoke screen - it's still a bad use of capital (remember 40% of illegals are visa overstays). It's just that Democrats are willing to capitulate and waste the $30b on a dumb fence and border security because that's the only way to get some Reps on board and pass the bill.

Completely agree.. It is dumb to build a literal human fence where even roads don't exist. The money is well spent on exit-entry system.
Wastage of money and "big goverment" is completely against Republican principles and clearly the "tea party" favorites are those who is favoring both of these in this case.
20k officers in southern borders is huge direct employment for ex-military returning back.. They do not need to be reskilled also.. I think that may be the real intention..

qesehmk
06-20-2013, 07:41 PM
Maybe that's why Republicans don't want to legalize - as long as they stay in the shadows, illegals can be exploited for the benefit of big biz.
That is quite right - one very good reason why republicans as well as big business don't want to legalize. Illegal labor suppresses wages which big business is very happy with.

gs1968
06-20-2013, 08:42 PM
A couple of links for some lighter reading on immigration and the farm bill

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/06/20/193955162/why-the-immigration-fight-seems-like-the-nba-finals

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/20/top-links-how-boehner-got-oceans-11ed-with-the-farm-bill-vote/

idiotic
06-20-2013, 09:15 PM
A couple of links for some lighter reading on immigration and the farm bill

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/06/20/193955162/why-the-immigration-fight-seems-like-the-nba-finals

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/20/top-links-how-boehner-got-oceans-11ed-with-the-farm-bill-vote/

MSNBC tells that Ted Cruz's father came into the country bending the rules by paying a bribe :)

axecapone
06-20-2013, 10:16 PM
That is quite right - one very good reason why republicans as well as big business don't want to legalize. Illegal labor suppresses wages which big business is very happy with.

Then I don't see any incentive to help legal immigrants as well because even legal immigrants help in wage/salary suppression.

Is there any incentive for anyone to pass this bill? For Republicans, yes: Vote bank!! Isn't vote bank politics big enough reason to pass it? Isn't this a low hanging fruit to repair their tarnished image among the immigrants? I just don't know what they want!

qesehmk
06-20-2013, 11:21 PM
That is quite right. Nobody has real incentive to actually do CIR. In that sense the only true friend of immigration (legal or otherwise) is a good economy!
Then I don't see any incentive to help legal immigrants as well because even legal immigrants help in wage/salary suppression.

Is there any incentive for anyone to pass this bill? For Republicans, yes: Vote bank!! Isn't vote bank politics big enough reason to pass it? Isn't this a low hanging fruit to repair their tarnished image among the immigrants? I just don't know what they want!

gs1968
06-21-2013, 08:46 AM
Another important breaking story-Why are they doing this?

http://www.latintimes.com/articles/5496/20130621/north-west-kim-kardashian-kanye-finally-reveal-baby-daughter-name.htm

Can anybody confirm this as true?

kuku82
06-21-2013, 08:55 AM
Hilarious.

vizcard
06-21-2013, 09:19 AM
MSNBC tells that Ted Cruz's father came into the country bending the rules by paying a bribe :)

technically he bent the rules to get out of Cuba - not enter the US. He bribed a Cuban immigration officer to get his exit stamp.

srimurthy
06-21-2013, 10:36 AM
Then I don't see any incentive to help legal immigrants as well because even legal immigrants help in wage/salary suppression.

Is there any incentive for anyone to pass this bill? For Republicans, yes: Vote bank!! Isn't vote bank politics big enough reason to pass it? Isn't this a low hanging fruit to repair their tarnished image among the immigrants? I just don't know what they want!

I am not sure there is any incentive for Republicans, as there is no guarentee that the new citizens are going to vote for them, forget about all of them, even if 10% consider voting for Republican party from that block that will be a surprise.

immitime
06-21-2013, 10:57 AM
Please point me the link which states Grassley lifted the hold. If it was the case no cloture was required. If there was another unknown senator holding up that bill it would have been another republican called sessions..

Cloture is very expensive for Senate which will not be used unless it is really required. It is well known that democratic stratergy is to get every force behind one bill and push it through.

The real people who do not want anything getting done is reps..

From Horses mouth.. for your reading pleasure.

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/Article.cfm?customel_dataPageID_1502=41746

my point of view is the real people who do not want to do anything on Real immigration (Legal govt approved!!) is the present administration and their party.

axecapone
06-21-2013, 11:02 AM
I was digging up Wikipedia when I discovered that American Indians (Citizens only) represent 1% of US population while American Chinese and American Filipino represent 1.2% and 1.1% respectively. So why is it that Latino's had a major impact in this elections while Indians or Chinese Americans did not? I am talking about citizens only because they are the only people who can vote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filipino_American
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_American

gs1968
06-21-2013, 11:04 AM
Cloture or Closure soon

http://washingtonexaminer.com/senate-immigration-fight-this-things-over/article/2532233

Then the bill moves on to the House, where it faces a troubled future. “In the end, it’s all moot,” says the Senate source. “While I expect it will pass here [the Senate], that will be the end of it. I don’t think the House will even take it up, much less pass it.”

Hoeven says on Fox News that one issue holding up the amendment is that Dems want federal benefits for people on RPI status.

idiotic
06-21-2013, 11:44 AM
From Horses mouth.. for your reading pleasure.

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/Article.cfm?customel_dataPageID_1502=41746

my point of view is the real people who do not want to do anything on Real immigration (Legal govt approved!!) is the present administration and their party.

If you read the letter he is clearly adding poison pills to HR3012 .. H1B reform.. Do you think it will pass with his amendment with unanimous consent?
If you have read his original amendment he offered to HR3012, he struck down the entire bill and added his H1B reform bill just retaining the title.
The only way HR3012 would have passed politically is without any amendments by unanimous consent.
Holds and poison pills are different ways of killing the bill..

rupen86
06-21-2013, 12:00 PM
Cloture or Closure soon

http://washingtonexaminer.com/senate-immigration-fight-this-things-over/article/2532233

Then the bill moves on to the House, where it faces a troubled future. “In the end, it’s all moot,” says the Senate source. “While I expect it will pass here [the Senate], that will be the end of it. I don’t think the House will even take it up, much less pass it.”

Hoeven says on Fox News that one issue holding up the amendment is that Dems want federal benefits for people on RPI status.

Looks like all the pending amendments will not even be taken up. I do not understand the urgency if house is not going to pick it up.

seahawks2012
06-21-2013, 12:39 PM
Looks like all the pending amendments will not even be taken up. I do not understand the urgency if house is not going to pick it up.

The urgency is to have a stronger negotiating position when the two bills (one from Senate & one from House) go to committee for agreeing on a single bill that maps to both positions. If the Senate bill is already water'ed down (from Democrat's point of view) then they loose the negotiation points in the committee.

abcx13
06-21-2013, 12:43 PM
Also remember that the Examiner is a conservative rag so it's not surprising that they are downplaying the bill...

immitime
06-21-2013, 12:49 PM
Yup.. If you read the letter he is clearly adding poison pills to HR3012 .. H1B reform.. Do you think it will pass with his amendment with unanimous consent?
If you have read his original amendment he offered to HR3012, he struck down the entire bill and added his H1B reform bill just retaining the title.
The only way HR3012 would have passed politically is without any amendments by unanimous consent.

Same applicable to this comB apprehensive bill. just waste of time.
Democrats want to blame republicans before the election. Very tuff to get this bill go through congress.

idiotic
06-21-2013, 12:56 PM
Same applicable to this comB apprehensive bill. just waste of time.
Democrats want to blame republicans before the election. Very tuff to get this bill go through congress.

It's not only democrats.. It is group of 8 including moderate republicans who worked on this bill and atleast they worked months by getting all parties involved and coming to an agreement. I won't discredit other's efforts and intentions without substantial evidence.

Real opposition to comp immigration reform or any immigration reform is from "Extreme Right wing" Conservative groups. S.744 is a just a demonstration of how difficult it is to defeat this "Right wing" even if you get all the possible lobbying behind one bill. That is democrats position and I do not see a problem with it as their intention is to get reform done(both illegal and legal).

My opinion is if Boehner takes up the S.744 from Senate as it and puts this on floor for a vote it will pass the house with moderate republicans and democrats voting strength. Extreme right wing republicans are the real problem and they have already said Boehner will lose his job if he does that !!

qesehmk
06-21-2013, 01:17 PM
Because Latinos are 17% of US population and growing! Compare that to 1% Indians or Chinese.
I was digging up Wikipedia when I discovered that American Indians (Citizens only) represent 1% of US population while American Chinese and American Filipino represent 1.2% and 1.1% respectively. So why is it that Latino's had a major impact in this elections while Indians or Chinese Americans did not? I am talking about citizens only because they are the only people who can vote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filipino_American
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_American

seattlet
06-21-2013, 01:24 PM
If they split Legal and Illegal Immigration into separate bills, the legal part will pass in 15 days ( in both senate and congress) in the current environment. My personal opinion is that the Obama Administration is strongly against it and hence they will force Harry Reid to ensure the legal only immigration bill doesnt come up for voting in senate. As a legal Immigrant, I do not have any thing to blame republicans for.

gs1968
06-21-2013, 01:28 PM
There will be a vote at 5:30pm on Monday on the Leahy amendment, which includes Corker-Hoeven. The vote will be on this sub bill.
Reid says they'll try to continue to allow people to offer amendments, but they probably won't pass.
Cloture on the entire bill will be Thursday

delguy
06-21-2013, 01:46 PM
Good news. Get over it in senate and all eyes will be on House.


There will be a vote at 5:30pm on Monday on the Leahy amendment, which includes Corker-Hoeven. The vote will be on this sub bill.
Reid says they'll try to continue to allow people to offer amendments, but they probably won't pass.
Cloture on the entire bill will be Thursday

idiotic
06-21-2013, 01:51 PM
If they split Legal and Illegal Immigration into separate bills, the legal part will pass in 15 days ( in both senate and congress) in the current environment.

Hugely mistaken .. Amendments and holds will be thrown from everywhere and you need strong leadership to overcome all of that. Republicans have no incenetive to do it as exploiting both legal and illegal immigrants(current system) is favorable to them.

An example, to beat CIR now Republicans are circulating an argument that E-Verify(their favorite child) is a privacy concern as it creates national database of citizens which government has hold on.

gs1968
06-21-2013, 01:56 PM
If they split Legal and Illegal Immigration into separate bills, the legal part will pass in 15 days ( in both senate and congress) in the current environment. My personal opinion is that the Obama Administration is strongly against it and hence they will force Harry Reid to ensure the legal only immigration bill doesnt come up for voting in senate. As a legal Immigrant, I do not have any thing to blame republicans for.
For the same reason that the Farm Bill does not separate the Food stamps from the Farmer subsidies. One cannot pass without the other. Both parties are equally to blame. The Democrats like the welfare component while the Republicans like the payouts to Midwest farmers. One thing to admire about the Tea Party conservatives is that they are ruthless ideologues who vote on their convictions and do not care about party image/fallout etc. A recent report said that due to redistricting the House GOP majority is probably safe until 2020. This is in stark contrast to the Senate Go8 for whom the same border security provisions were a complete waste of time and resources last week and suddenly now they are the solution to everything that is wrong with this country. The term flip-flop comes to mind. Anyway the farm Bill fiasco has probably put off any house action till mid-July at the very least (after the conference on July 9). 2 Bills have been marked up by the HJC vastly different from the Senate and there was hope they would come to vote on Jun 28 but I think the well is poisoned now and the atmosphere too volatile to take chances. The Tea Party is smelling blood after the recent IRS scandals and has regained a lot of energy. There are 16 legislative days in July before the summer recess and I really feel they are going to slow walk immigration till after the recess is over.This allows the Congressmen to hear from the constituents and get a better feel for the sentiment before any further action. If they did not feel pressured by the importance of the Farm Bill which directly affects their constituents I doubt that they are in any rush to pass immigration.

vizcard
06-21-2013, 02:00 PM
It's not only democrats.. It is group of 8 including moderate republicans who worked on this bill and atleast they worked months by getting all parties involved and coming to an agreement. I won't discredit other's efforts and intentions without substantial evidence.

Real opposition to comp immigration reform or any immigration reform is from "Extreme Right wing" Conservative groups. S.744 is a just a demonstration of how difficult it is to defeat this "Right wing" even if you get all the possible lobbying behind one bill. That is democrats position and I do not see a problem with it as their intention is to get reform done(both illegal and legal).

My opinion is if Boehner takes up the S.744 from Senate as it and puts this on floor for a vote it will pass the house with moderate republicans and democrats voting strength. Extreme right wing republicans are the real problem and they have already said Boehner will lose his job if he does that !!

Boehner is not going to bring the Senate bill to the floor since it probably doesnt have majority of House republicans supporting it. House Representatives are only looking our for their own jobs. Steve King an the other nut jobs are from backward, white super majority constituencies. i have to say the Tea Party is the worst thing that's happened to American politics.


If they split Legal and Illegal Immigration into separate bills, the legal part will pass in 15 days ( in both senate and congress) in the current environment. My personal opinion is that the Obama Administration is strongly against it and hence they will force Harry Reid to ensure the legal only immigration bill doesnt come up for voting in senate. As a legal Immigrant, I do not have any thing to blame republicans for.

immigration reform failed even under the Bush administration because republicans killed the bill in the senate..inspite of having the backing of a republican president and had democrats controlling both houses of congress. just research the voting records on that bill.

immitime
06-21-2013, 02:15 PM
It's not only democrats.. It is group of 8 including moderate republicans who worked on this bill and atleast they worked months by getting all parties involved and coming to an agreement. I won't discredit other's efforts and intentions without substantial evidence.

Real opposition to comp immigration reform or any immigration reform is from "Extreme Right wing" Conservative groups. S.744 is a just a demonstration of how difficult it is to defeat this "Right wing" even if you get all the possible lobbying behind one bill. That is democrats position and I do not see a problem with it as their intention is to get reform done(both illegal and legal).

My opinion is if Boehner takes up the S.744 from Senate as it and puts this on floor for a vote it will pass the house with moderate republicans and democrats voting strength. Extreme right wing republicans are the real problem and they have already said Boehner will lose his job if he does that !!

My question is why Democrats want to give US Citizenship to Illegals. Even extreme right wingers are ok with giving them conditional green cards as per the reports. But democrats want to do that for votes. Whe gang of 8 have some compromise... lot of extreme left wing democracts which is not at all agreeing to that.. so bipartisan bill should be really bipartisan otherwise nothing is going to happen. I mean compromise from each party is required. There should be no speciality for ruling party. Only thing we need to look at is the undisputed administration is having the political will to have an executive order if the bill fails.

qesehmk
06-21-2013, 02:59 PM
My question is why Democrats want to give US Citizenship to Illegals. Even extreme right wingers are ok with giving them conditional green cards as per the reports. But democrats want to do that for votes. Whe gang of 8 have some compromise... lot of extreme left wing democracts which is not at all agreeing to that.. so bipartisan bill should be really bipartisan otherwise nothing is going to happen. I mean compromise from each party is required. There should be no speciality for ruling party. Only thing we need to look at is the undisputed administration is having the political will to have an executive order if the bill fails.
immitime - I am afraid this question is on the right of the extreme right wingers.
The answer is because they are human beings ... have ties here in US .. may be spent most of their life here. So what makes one eligible for citizenship? Some stupid circumstance that you were born in the right womb at the right time and place and were lucky that your family were able to do grow you up where you could legally immigrate?

In your book it seems the people who are not so fortunate have no place in this society. That's a very unfortunate elitist approach I must say. But fortunately America's true character is very liberal and most Americans do not think the way you think. It's all the more shameful that you speak as you do while still being on the other side.

idiotic
06-21-2013, 03:09 PM
Even extreme right wingers are ok with giving them conditional green cards as per the reports.

Devil is in the details. I also think Democrats should compromise on this if the new "permanent underclass" is not truly unjust.
Let us look at house version of CIR to evaluate "extreme right wingers" if they have good intentions really :)

immitime
06-21-2013, 03:48 PM
immitime - I am afraid this question is on the right of the extreme right wingers.
The answer is because they are human beings ... have ties here in US .. may be spent most of their life here. So what makes one eligible for citizenship? Some stupid circumstance that you were born in the right womb at the right time and place and were lucky that your family were able to do grow you up where you could legally immigrate?

In your book it seems the people who are not so fortunate have no place in this society. That's a very unfortunate elitist approach I must say. But fortunately America's true character is very liberal and most Americans do not think the way you think. It's all the more shameful that you speak as you do while still being on the other side.

Q,

In the same way the answer is people in EB waiting also are human beings and did not cross the borders illegally.

I am happy that you came out with your ture colors friend... assuming things by yourself is not good. If you feel you are a democrat... that is ok That does not mean that you get emotional and personally attack other members if your views are not noded here. You behave like another pappu of ** all are same. I never said I am on the otherside.. First read and understand the threads title.. are you Mad??? The real uncultural barbarian words of any of our country men came out from you.

Don't forget to engage illegals to have your lawn done.. if you are real and having guts you should keep this reply without deleting

The same stupid way you born might be for useless cases and you have the Green now and you are talking like any of our countrymen hoping that you feel you are from Indian origin still and not gora yet or you are painting yourself as one.

Bye from your forum and the so called elite group.

qesehmk
06-21-2013, 03:55 PM
immitime - good luck wherever you go. Attacking other immigrant groups and demeaning them has never been my specialty and yes I agree - I have zero tolerance for that.

Having said that, of course, I will keep this post here not just in the spirit of FREE SPEECH but also as a lesson to other idiots like you who are too self-centered to understand that their own well being is in standing together with other immigrant groups.

p.s. - For the record - you are leaving on your own. Apparently, the same freedom of speech you grant yourself - you couldn't grant to me and in protest are leaving the forum. My best to you.


Q,

In the same way the answer is people in EB waiting also are human beings and did not cross the borders illegally.

I am happy that you came out with your ture colors friend... assuming things by yourself is not good. If you feel you are a democrat... that is ok That does not mean that you get emotional and personally attack other members if your views are not noded here. You behave like another pappu of ** all are same. I never said I am on the otherside.. First read and understand the threads title.. are you Mad??? The real uncultural barbarian words of any of our country men came out from you.

Don't forget to engage illegals to have your lawn done.. if you are real and having guts you should keep this reply without deleting

The same stupid way you born might be for useless cases and you have the Green now and you are talking like any of our countrymen hoping that you feel you are from Indian origin still and not gora yet or you are painting yourself as one.

Bye from your forum and the so called elite group.

abcx13
06-21-2013, 04:05 PM
Q,

In the same way the answer is people in EB waiting also are human beings and did not cross the borders illegally.

I am happy that you came out with your ture colors friend... assuming things by yourself is not good. If you feel you are a democrat... that is ok That does not mean that you get emotional and personally attack other members if your views are not noded here. You behave like another pappu of ** all are same. I never said I am on the otherside.. First read and understand the threads title.. are you Mad??? The real uncultural barbarian words of any of our country men came out from you.

Don't forget to engage illegals to have your lawn done.. if you are real and having guts you should keep this reply without deleting

The same stupid way you born might be for useless cases and you have the Green now and you are talking like any of our countrymen hoping that you feel you are from Indian origin still and not gora yet or you are painting yourself as one.

Bye from your forum and the so called elite group.

Not well said, but I agree completely with the intended message.

gs1968
06-21-2013, 04:38 PM
To Q/abcx13/immitime

It needs no reminding that this is one of the most civil and courteous blogs for immigration and I am confident that I am not alone in feeling disappointed at the last few posts.I frequent this forum to gather views from various viewpoints and I sincerely hope that emotions cool down and everybody continues their contribution.It is understandable to feel frustrated by lack of progress with the GC process and we all hope to see all the long waiters greened soon

idiotic
06-21-2013, 04:40 PM
To Q/abcx13/immitime

It needs no reminding that this is one of the most civil and courteous blogs for immigration and I am confident that I am not alone in feeling disappointed at the last few posts.I frequent this forum to gather views from various viewpoints and I sincerely hope that emotions cool down and everybody continues their contribution.It is understandable to feel frustrated by lack of progress with the GC process and we all hope to see all the long waiters greened soon

Strongly Agree !!!! Let's stop this and return back to real talking points !!!!

axecapone
06-21-2013, 04:55 PM
Not well said, but I agree completely with the intended message.

I agree with his message as well. As much as America is a liberal country, its also a law abiding country and as a law abiding immigrant who has come through the right channels, I don't feel its right to give away citizenship like giving away Halloween candies. What happens when a legal immigrant on visa loses his job? He may have a house, a car and kids going to school but DHS does not care. He is asked to pack up and LEAVE and legal immigrants. Hell, they don't even give you enough time to wrap up things.

Now lets look at the current situation. Now not only did folks enter illegally into the US but thanks to amendments for THEM, we, honest, legal, law abiding folks are again on the losing side. How is that fair? Its not fair. People who want to pass the bill also know its not fair but they are doing it because of the 17% vote bank that they can capture.

Anyway my 2 cents, not that it matter now.

indiani
06-21-2013, 05:07 PM
I agree with his message as well. As much as America is a liberal country, its also a law abiding country and as a law abiding immigrant who has come through the right channels, I don't feel its right to give away citizenship like giving away Halloween candies. What happens when a legal immigrant on visa loses his job? He may have a house, a car and kids going to school but DHS does not care. He is asked to pack up and LEAVE and legal immigrants. Hell, they don't even give you enough time to wrap up things.

Now lets look at the current situation. Now not only did folks enter illegally into the US but thanks to amendments for THEM, we, honest, legal, law abiding folks are again on the losing side. How is that fair? Its not fair. People who want to pass the bill also know its not fair but they are doing it because of the 17% vote bank that they can capture.

Anyway my 2 cents, not that it matter now.

I also have more or less the same feeling.

coming to this country after finishing medical school, waiting for 13 years and , has always been worried about losing "status" and probably anxiety will not die until few onths after GC.

however just b'cos its politically convinient, Democrats nd some republicans are racing to give away GC and eventual citizenship to millions.

Inspite of all the economic parameters in the news, I look at the economic impact this way: any developed country will easily can get millions of unskilled labor to be part of their country by opening borders and just doing criminal check. But in fact most rich countries give mostly temporary status to limited few and permanent status in even fewer cases, at the same time for high skilled person, its easy to migrate ( logic is simple, highly skilled people are good for any nation in the long run )

having said all above, even though CIR doesn't help me personally, for everyone waiting for GC (legals+illegals ) that is the single best thing to happen as a whole ( no other bill will be introduced in the near future), i have been still lobbying for CIR to pass ( still very actively ) with all my time restraints.

idiotic
06-21-2013, 05:27 PM
The choices before us are simple :
1) Support CIR as a whole group against the forces who are standing inbetween
2) Live with present state

I do not see a reason for us to think in the lines of illegal vs legal. Under CIR all present legal queue will be cleared before an "Illegal" gets his GC. There is no reason for "legals" to complain about this.
If other people gets Citizenship too, so be it. They have lives too !! They came here for a better life and let them get it !! Some of the illegals are illegal for even no fault of their own. Even though under law they are illegal, under the spirit of the law they are not. I think Obama took executive action only for those group(Children brought to USA by illegal parents).

I think all of us want option 1. Lets fight only the forces who are standing against it. My opinion is only republicans are standing in between !! I am not seeing any democrat standing in between (If you say democrat is not agreeing to reasonable proposal from Republican, prove me with the details)!!
The only group which like option 2 will be those who suck the blood of immigrants(legal or illegal).

Gang of 8 had polticians like McCain who stated clearly he is supporting only because he did not like the exploitation of immigrants. I think all of us should support and respect that.

Disclaimer:
============
I am a legal immigrant too.. Not even 1 second out of status in this country..
I am not democrat

qesehmk
06-21-2013, 05:34 PM
Guys ... all of us have come legally here. I think sometimes we lose perspective how fortunate we are vs those that aren't. Instead of being jealous that illegals will "someday" get citizenship - just think about their plight. I live in Arizona and I see it first hand. These people work for $6/hour. Are constantly afraid and live a third rate life in the shadows where they are exploited from all sides and all angles. Going back is worse and so they prefer to live like this. Their children grow up in low income houses with high crime around and low opportunities.

You and I - most of the times earn 6 figures or very high 5 figures. In some cases I know some of us earn half million as well. The only thing we missed was - I could've earned twice of that.

So if we keep this perspective in mind then we might feel less bad about others getting a citizenship 10-20 years from now. I agree I felt quite upset ... but I guess I somehow correlate this tendency to be utterly oblivious to others' plight to the same tendency we see in Indian society where we have treated our own people with utter disrespect and oppressed them for years and years. I smelt the same carelessness here and I reacted. May be I was wrong. But if past is any experience - I probably wasn't.

Perhaps now I have explained my thought process better. I do think everybody has a right to speak but then right to speak comes with right to listen to criticism. So by all means criticize me if you think I am wrong.

p.s. - Another practical thing not to be forgotten is that EB reform is happening on the back of CIR - not vice versa. So speaking against "illegals" is - using my favorite metaphor - is worse than "Peir pe kulhadi" and amounts to "Kulhadi pe peir".

idiotic
06-21-2013, 05:52 PM
http://sgtreport.com/2013/06/nwo-minion-john-mccain-cares-deeply-about-illegal-immigrants-who-are-being-exploited-every-day/

Either support the video or support those who commented on the page :)

indiani
06-21-2013, 06:06 PM
Guys ... all of us have come legally here. I think sometimes we lose perspective how fortunate we are vs those that aren't. Instead of being jealous that illegals will "someday" get citizenship - just think about their plight. I live in Arizona and I see it first hand. These people work for $6/hour. Are constantly afraid and live a third rate life in the shadows where they are exploited from all sides and all angles. Going back is worse and so they prefer to live like this. Their children grow up in low income houses with high crime around and low opportunities.

You and I - most of the times earn 6 figures or very high 5 figures. In some cases I know some of us earn half million as well. The only thing we missed was - I could've earned twice of that.

So if we keep this perspective in mind then we might feel less bad about others getting a citizenship 10-20 years from now. I agree I felt quite upset ... but I guess I somehow correlate this tendency to be utterly oblivious to others' plight to the same tendency we see in Indian society and oppressed them for years and years. I smelt the same carelessness here and I reacted. May be I was wrong. But if past is any experience - I probably wasn't.

Perhaps now I have explained my thought process better. I do think everybody has a right to speak but then right to speak comes with right to listen to criticism. So by all means criticize me if you think I am wrong.

p.s. - Another practical thing not to be forgotten is that EB reform is happening on the back of CIR - not vice versa. So speaking against "illegals" is - using my favorite metaphor - is worse than "Peir pe kulhadi" and amounts to "Kulhadi pe peir".

Your last point is excellent one and I completely agree that without "pathway for illegals' indian backlog would have been there for decades to come.

Having said that I want to give perspective ( everyone develops one b'cos of unique life circumstances):

1. "where we have treated our own people with utter disrespect " : not everyone ill-treated, atleast not me (in fact i was at the receiving end for being born in the wrong caste wrong time , i belong to "OC")

2. Money was never my worry ( even though i could have made 100K plus more per year), in fact I lost lot of things that I value lot more than money.

3. illegals are exploited for sure but they still "chose" to stay. for example many indian manual laborers are ill-treated in middle east ( far worse than illegals treated in USA ) but I doubt they ever get atleast human rights , well once again they chose to stay there instead of dying in india

gs1968
06-21-2013, 06:21 PM
I am glad to see that the tone of discussion is back to where we all like it. I am a pediatrician with a very large Spanish patient base and meet families who are not in legal status on a daily basis and perhaps have a better perspective of where the discussion stands amongst them.
I feel it might be easier to illustrate with a few examples I have had recently as the stories will illustrate their plight better than pages of prose. Last year as I was getting ready for our lunch break,a mother and her son aged 17 whom I have known for 7 years came to meet me. The boy was the oldest of 3 children the younger two being citizens being born here.He was a high school senior and was really excited about the DACA order that President Obama had recently passed. I helped him with a lot of documentation from office records dating back to 2006 to establish proof of residency and also agreed to attest a notarized affidavit for the same.The family said that the school authorities were not receptive to their needs and they had no other alternative than to approach us. He was granted the status and he was ecstatic-his actual words were "I never thought I would ever get this chance".More recently he has joined the nursing program at our local community college and thanked us again when he came in to have his TB skin testing done. It pained me when the house GOP passed the amendment defunding the DACA on Jun 6 but I feel it was posturing at its best and most of them are sympathetic to DREAMERs
I have another child in my practice who is 4 and his mother was deported 2 years ago to Guatemala.As she had re-entered illegally she was barred from entry for 10 years.I am struggling with behavioral and sleep problems in this child who is awake most of the night screaming for his mother. The father will not send him to Guatemala as he is afraid they will keep the child there and never send him back. I can close my eyes and count at least 20 other children where one of the parents has been deported in my practice
I have 2 children in my practice whose father and their uncle (in their 30s now) migrated illegally from Honduras 10 years ago. They are the only 2 children of their grandmother who is still back in the Honduras with advanced uterine cancer. It was heart breaking for me when the children's mother told me in Spanish "Whenever we call her all she keeps saying is if I could only hug the boys for 5 minutes before I die" Unfortunately both the parents are illegal and even though the children (ages 3 & 5) are citizens there is nobody to take them there.
I could go on and on but the only reason I bring this up is that in all the above cases all the families are looking for is some legal status where they can lead a normal life and be able to travel to their home countries and be able to return safely.I can assure you that citizenship is the furthest thing from their minds at this time. I quote from Rep Carter (TX) one of the House Group of 8 in the following article
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/29/house-immigration-bill_n_3180612.html
It (the House Bill)has compassion. It allows people to be human beings, to live a normal life, to have a job, to take care of their family, to pay their taxes, to obey the law and go about their lives."
The Republicans will not likely agree to a Special pathway to citizenship like W visas etc but will allow some form of legalization that allows people to stay here and continue to lead their lives and be united with their family. They will most likely be allowed to convert to Green cards through existing channels examples being if they have US born children or have US spouses who can sponsor them or employment based sponsorship etc. We keep talking about pressure on the GOP but if the talks reach a point where the GOP stands firm and is willing for legalization but no special pathway, the winds can change just as quick and the Democrats will be under pressure to accept the deal from the Latino community. At least deportations will stop and families can stay together,travel abroad, buy homes etc. Qs point about whether this makes them second class citizens can be debated till the cows come home.I wish to point out that at any time in this country there are millions of people who are in legal non-immigrant status and seem to lead normal lives

vizcard
06-21-2013, 08:13 PM
Gs - excellent post. Any legal status is a win for the illegals here.

I personally don't like the idea of not having a pathway to citizenship because every legal immigrant should have the opportunity to naturalize. By giving current illegals an RPI or green card implies you are making them legal immigrants.

Push comes to shove, I would be willing to support taking out the P2C in favor of passing everything else.

The other solution (and I say this tongue in cheek) is to do what this congress does best - punt on the hard issues. Pass the easy stuff now, introduce a new bill later to solve the hard problem like the sequesters.

indiani
06-21-2013, 09:16 PM
I am glad to see that the tone of discussion is back to where we all like it. I am a pediatrician with a very large Spanish patient base and meet families who are not in legal status on a daily basis and perhaps have a better perspective of where the discussion stands amongst them.
I feel it might be easier to illustrate with a few examples I have had recently as the stories will illustrate their plight better than pages of prose. Last year as I was getting ready for our lunch break,a mother and her son aged 17 whom I have known for 7 years came to meet me. The boy was the oldest of 3 children the younger two being citizens being born here.He was a high school senior and was really excited about the DACA order that President Obama had recently passed. I helped him with a lot of documentation from office records dating back to 2006 to establish proof of residency and also agreed to attest a notarized affidavit for the same.The family said that the school authorities were not receptive to their needs and they had no other alternative than to approach us. He was granted the status and he was ecstatic-his actual words were "I never thought I would ever get this chance".More recently he has joined the nursing program at our local community college and thanked us again when he came in to have his TB skin testing done. It pained me when the house GOP passed the amendment defunding the DACA on Jun 6 but I feel it was posturing at its best and most of them are sympathetic to DREAMERs
I have another child in my practice who is 4 and his mother was deported 2 years ago to Guatemala.As she had re-entered illegally she was barred from entry for 10 years.I am struggling with behavioral and sleep problems in this child who is awake most of the night screaming for his mother. The father will not send him to Guatemala as he is afraid they will keep the child there and never send him back. I can close my eyes and count at least 20 other children where one of the parents has been deported in my practice
I have 2 children in my practice whose father and their uncle (in their 30s now) migrated illegally from Honduras 10 years ago. They are the only 2 children of their grandmother who is still back in the Honduras with advanced uterine cancer. It was heart breaking for me when the children's mother told me in Spanish "Whenever we call her all she keeps saying is if I could only hug the boys for 5 minutes before I die" Unfortunately both the parents are illegal and even though the children (ages 3 & 5) are citizens there is nobody to take them there.
I could go on and on but the only reason I bring this up is that in all the above cases all the families are looking for is some legal status where they can lead a normal life and be able to travel to their home countries and be able to return safely.I can assure you that citizenship is the furthest thing from their minds at this time. I quote from Rep Carter (TX) one of the House Group of 8 in the following article
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/29/house-immigration-bill_n_3180612.html
It (the House Bill)has compassion. It allows people to be human beings, to live a normal life, to have a job, to take care of their family, to pay their taxes, to obey the law and go about their lives."
The Republicans will not likely agree to a Special pathway to citizenship like W visas etc but will allow some form of legalization that allows people to stay here and continue to lead their lives and be united with their family. They will most likely be allowed to convert to Green cards through existing channels examples being if they have US born children or have US spouses who can sponsor them or employment based sponsorship etc. We keep talking about pressure on the GOP but if the talks reach a point where the GOP stands firm and is willing for legalization but no special pathway, the winds can change just as quick and the Democrats will be under pressure to accept the deal from the Latino community. At least deportations will stop and families can stay together,travel abroad, buy homes etc. Qs point about whether this makes them second class citizens can be debated till the cows come home.I wish to point out that at any time in this country there are millions of people who are in legal non-immigrant status and seem to lead normal lives

I read almost the entire post, I think the perceptions and opinions differ based on the life experiences, but I can give you the perspective of someone ( US citizen who cleans places for a living ) who is worried that their jobs could be taken away b'cos once all the illegals get EAD's they can change jobs and be eligible to work for any job that currently citizens are eligible for.

They aren't stuck anymore like legals to work in the same or similar job until GC, so essentailly it works as their "GC" right away and they will be eligible to compete for jobs in grocery stores, food chains etc. for which working class citizens (blue collar workers ) struggle to find. For the last 13 years all the people whom I ever hired for doing household work are "citizens" and most of them are hard working.

I hope you don't assume everyone who opposes for any legalisation is a bigot. Personally i have a lot to gain for reasons you can imagine with CIR passing but I think there are US citizens ( esp. blue collar) who have their own concerns .

abcx13
06-21-2013, 09:41 PM
I am glad to see that the tone of discussion is back to where we all like it. I am a pediatrician with a very large Spanish patient base and meet families who are not in legal status on a daily basis and perhaps have a better perspective of where the discussion stands amongst them.
I feel it might be easier to illustrate with a few examples I have had recently as the stories will illustrate their plight better than pages of prose. Last year as I was getting ready for our lunch break,a mother and her son aged 17 whom I have known for 7 years came to meet me. The boy was the oldest of 3 children the younger two being citizens being born here.He was a high school senior and was really excited about the DACA order that President Obama had recently passed. I helped him with a lot of documentation from office records dating back to 2006 to establish proof of residency and also agreed to attest a notarized affidavit for the same.The family said that the school authorities were not receptive to their needs and they had no other alternative than to approach us. He was granted the status and he was ecstatic-his actual words were "I never thought I would ever get this chance".More recently he has joined the nursing program at our local community college and thanked us again when he came in to have his TB skin testing done. It pained me when the house GOP passed the amendment defunding the DACA on Jun 6 but I feel it was posturing at its best and most of them are sympathetic to DREAMERs
I have another child in my practice who is 4 and his mother was deported 2 years ago to Guatemala.As she had re-entered illegally she was barred from entry for 10 years.I am struggling with behavioral and sleep problems in this child who is awake most of the night screaming for his mother. The father will not send him to Guatemala as he is afraid they will keep the child there and never send him back. I can close my eyes and count at least 20 other children where one of the parents has been deported in my practice
I have 2 children in my practice whose father and their uncle (in their 30s now) migrated illegally from Honduras 10 years ago. They are the only 2 children of their grandmother who is still back in the Honduras with advanced uterine cancer. It was heart breaking for me when the children's mother told me in Spanish "Whenever we call her all she keeps saying is if I could only hug the boys for 5 minutes before I die" Unfortunately both the parents are illegal and even though the children (ages 3 & 5) are citizens there is nobody to take them there.
I could go on and on but the only reason I bring this up is that in all the above cases all the families are looking for is some legal status where they can lead a normal life and be able to travel to their home countries and be able to return safely.I can assure you that citizenship is the furthest thing from their minds at this time. I quote from Rep Carter (TX) one of the House Group of 8 in the following article
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/29/house-immigration-bill_n_3180612.html
It (the House Bill)has compassion. It allows people to be human beings, to live a normal life, to have a job, to take care of their family, to pay their taxes, to obey the law and go about their lives."
The Republicans will not likely agree to a Special pathway to citizenship like W visas etc but will allow some form of legalization that allows people to stay here and continue to lead their lives and be united with their family. They will most likely be allowed to convert to Green cards through existing channels examples being if they have US born children or have US spouses who can sponsor them or employment based sponsorship etc. We keep talking about pressure on the GOP but if the talks reach a point where the GOP stands firm and is willing for legalization but no special pathway, the winds can change just as quick and the Democrats will be under pressure to accept the deal from the Latino community. At least deportations will stop and families can stay together,travel abroad, buy homes etc. Qs point about whether this makes them second class citizens can be debated till the cows come home.I wish to point out that at any time in this country there are millions of people who are in legal non-immigrant status and seem to lead normal lives

Um, sorry, but no. Give GCs and citizenship to Dreamers but I see no reason to reward illegals who were irresponsible in the first place to have kids. A lot of these people don't have the means to support kids and now we should cut them slack just because they have kids and their families could be separated? Sure, cut the kids slack, but the parents? Really? I realize that separating families hurts the kids so maybe give the parents GCs, but no citizenship. If I were a citizen, why the hell would I want these people to vote? They have shown a blatant disregard for the law and clearly have no sense of responsibility by having kids for whom they can't provide because of their immigration or economic status. Besides, if legals can't get GCs for being out of status (see the recent I485 RFEs from the TSC) why the hell should illegals get GCs, let alone citizenship, for being out of status? Because there are 11m of them and because they've been out of status forever? That's a dumb non-reason.

I realize this sounds ugly but it is what it is.

abcx13
06-21-2013, 09:49 PM
Guys ... all of us have come legally here. I think sometimes we lose perspective how fortunate we are vs those that aren't. Instead of being jealous that illegals will "someday" get citizenship - just think about their plight. I live in Arizona and I see it first hand. These people work for $6/hour. Are constantly afraid and live a third rate life in the shadows where they are exploited from all sides and all angles. Going back is worse and so they prefer to live like this. Their children grow up in low income houses with high crime around and low opportunities.

So if we keep this perspective in mind then we might feel less bad about others getting a citizenship 10-20 years from now. I agree I felt quite upset ... but I guess I somehow correlate this tendency to be utterly oblivious to others' plight to the same tendency we see in Indian society where we have treated our own people with utter disrespect and oppressed them for years and years.

p.s. - Another practical thing not to be forgotten is that EB reform is happening on the back of CIR - not vice versa. So speaking against "illegals" is - using my favorite metaphor - is worse than "Peir pe kulhadi" and amounts to "Kulhadi pe peir".

1. I'm not 'jealous' that they are getting citizenship. Anyone would have to be moronic to be jealous of illegals. It's a matter of fairness. They didn't follow the law and it is unfair to reward them with even the possibility of citizenship just for having the skill of staying illegally.

2. I don't agree that going back is worse for them. What about all the ones who stay in their home countries? In any case, it's still a choice they are making. They are free to leave if they don't like the laws of the country that they seem to have invaded.

3. I would treat them with respect if they obeyed the law and played by the same rules. But until then, I really don't see why my tax dollars are going to provide any services to these people, or, yes, even their kids, when they aren't putting their fair share into the system. Yes, I feel cheated. Why is it my duty to educate the kids of illegals - born overseas or here - if their parents can't support them? I'd rather have lower taxes and donate that money to educate kids in India or elsewhere.

4. EB reform could have happened a long time ago if it were not for a spineless President who is insistent on tying job creating, economy boosting high-skilled immigration to unskilled, non-law abiding, typically non-English speaking, and non-self sufficient fence jumpers and visa overstays.

Jonty Rhodes
06-21-2013, 10:36 PM
immitime - I am afraid this question is on the right of the extreme right wingers.
The answer is because they are human beings ... have ties here in US .. may be spent most of their life here. So what makes one eligible for citizenship? Some stupid circumstance that you were born in the right womb at the right time and place and were lucky that your family were able to do grow you up where you could legally immigrate?

In your book it seems the people who are not so fortunate have no place in this society. That's a very unfortunate elitist approach I must say. But fortunately America's true character is very liberal and most Americans do not think the way you think. It's all the more shameful that you speak as you do while still being on the other side.

Q,

With due respect, I tend to disagree with you on this one. I think immitime raised a pretty valid question. I personally do not have any problem with pathway to citizenship to illegals but immitime has a point here. For Democrats, this is their future vote bank. They are not only doing this from a humanistic stand point. Republicans on the other side are willing to do it, especially in the Senate, because they know that they can also woo Hispanics to vote for them in next elections if they pass Immigration Reform. If Republicans don't do it, as many experts have analysed, they will not be in White House again. Now, anybody can disagree with this analysis but the fact remains that both parties have their own reasons to support CIR.

Because both parties have their own interests driving them to pass CIR, both parties have to compromise on several important principles that may be dear to them, in good faith of the bill, just like Leahy dropped the LGBT amendment in the judiciary mark up (although he came up with that later on). Then and only then, it will be a real bipartisan bill. That is why I agree with immitime again. I would disagree with Republicans for the poison pill amendments that they have introduced to kill the bill, like Cornyn border security and several others. But I would also disagree with the Democrats on insisting to get the federal health care benefits for illegals. That is just unsustainable for the health care system in my eyes, and an unnecessary burden on law abiding tax paying legal immigrants, permanent resident and citizens.

I seriously did not feel that immitime's question was on the right of the extreme right wingers. In fact, immitime has divided things black (law-breaking people) vs white (law-abiding people) which is not necessarily wrong while looking at it objectively. When you add humanistic angle to the immigration reform, things become grey and the line between right and wrong starts getting blurred. But no where, I felt that immitime's comment was elitist in nature and that he did not have regards for people who are less fortunate. There is nothing shameful in what immitime said and in fact, if you ask people, majority may agree with him.

I have nothing personal against illegals. In fact, I have worked in a free community clinic in Chicago for 3 years as a volunteer treating illegals only and every now and then, you stumble upon a sad story or tragedy. It is unfortunate but that's life. Ideal things happen in ideal world and unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world.

Just to give you a simple example. When illegal Bangladeshi immigrants come in India, again there will be same humanistic arguments (poverty in Bangladesh, better job opportunity in India, better life compared to Bangladesh etc.) but at the end of the day, the fact remains that their constant flow has changed demographics in Assam and now the native Bodo tribe has become a minority, losing their land and is facing a discrimination. Politicians have provided them ration cards and voter identification cards to get votes from last many years. Eventual Result: Assam Riots.

Now, obviously this can't be compared to US immigration but concept is similar. Protecting country's citizens and their interests, should be the primary aim of any immigration policy and the debate of how to do that is wide open and very partisan unfortunately.

CIR is a tricky issue and emotions run high. But I think we all should be pragmatic because we don't live in a Utopian world.

Sorry, not trying to be preachy. Just my humble opinion.

P.S: immitime, I hope you are reading this and I sincerely wish you come back to this forum. You have been a very valuable member of the forum and have contributed immensely to it. Don't have a fall out on this minor issue of difference of opinions. Peace.

idiotic
06-21-2013, 10:58 PM
http://www.fwd.us/commit

For those of you who want to see S.744 become law.. please spend few minutes on the above link and support..

indiani
06-21-2013, 10:58 PM
Jonty,

I think Q welcomes any opinion ( I did differ with him a lot of times ) but the reply to Q from immitime appeared somewhat like a personal attack ( at atleast thats my perception ).

I like this forum lot better than trackitt or **.

I think Dems like lot of folks in lower socio-economic status ( they depend on handouts ),

Bottomline: no matter whats anyone's opinions are, when it comes to action pls do everything you can to pass CIR ( this is only a request, not demand ) and I did whatever i could.

gcq
06-21-2013, 11:23 PM
In the discussions about legal vs illegal, "we all came legal here" arguments, there is one point we tend to miss. Neither us or the Europeans who consider USA as if it is their land have no right to be here to begin with. This continent is North America ( not Europe, not Asia). If anyone can claim any right to this land , it would be Hispanics They at least belong to this continent. We all ( including the Europeans who claim this to be their country ) are all immigrants/invaders.

Hispanics has every right to say "WTH, this is our continent, what are these Europeans and Asians doing here ?"

abcx13
06-21-2013, 11:24 PM
Q,

With due respect, I tend to disagree with you on this one. I think immitime raised a pretty valid question. I personally do not have any problem with pathway to citizenship to illegals but immitime has a point here. For Democrats, this is their future vote bank. They are not only doing this from a humanistic stand point. Republicans on the other side are willing to do it, especially in the Senate, because they know that they can also woo Hispanics to vote for them in next elections if they pass Immigration Reform. If Republicans don't do it, as many experts have analysed, they will not be in White House again. Now, anybody can disagree with this analysis but the fact remains that both parties have their own reasons to support CIR.

Because both parties have their own interests driving them to pass CIR, both parties have to compromise on several important principles that may be dear to them, in good faith of the bill, just like Leahy dropped the LGBT amendment in the judiciary mark up (although he came up with that later on). Then and only then, it will be a real bipartisan bill. That is why I agree with immitime again. I would disagree with Republicans for the poison pill amendments that they have introduced to kill the bill, like Cornyn border security and several others. But I would also disagree with the Democrats on insisting to get the federal health care benefits for illegals. That is just unsustainable for the health care system in my eyes, and an unnecessary burden on law abiding tax paying legal immigrants, permanent resident and citizens.

I seriously did not feel that immitime's question was on the right of the extreme right wingers. In fact, immitime has divided things black (law-breaking people) vs white (law-abiding people) which is not necessarily wrong while looking at it objectively. When you add humanistic angle to the immigration reform, things become grey and the line between right and wrong starts getting blurred. But no where, I felt that immitime's comment was elitist in nature and that he did not have regards for people who are less fortunate. There is nothing shameful in what immitime said and in fact, if you ask people, majority may agree with him.

I have nothing personal against illegals. In fact, I have worked in a free community clinic in Chicago for 3 years as a volunteer treating illegals only and every now and then, you stumble upon a sad story or tragedy. It is unfortunate but that's life. Ideal things happen in ideal world and unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world.

Just to give you a simple example. When illegal Bangladeshi immigrants come in India, again there will be same humanistic arguments (poverty in Bangladesh, better job opportunity in India, better life compared to Bangladesh etc.) but at the end of the day, the fact remains that their constant flow has changed demographics in Assam and now the native Bodo tribe has become a minority, losing their land and is facing a discrimination. Politicians have provided them ration cards and voter identification cards to get votes from last many years. Eventual Result: Assam Riots.

Now, obviously this can't be compared to US immigration but concept is similar. Protecting country's citizens and their interests, should be the primary aim of any immigration policy and the debate of how to do that is wide open and very partisan unfortunately.

CIR is a tricky issue and emotions run high. But I think we all should be pragmatic because we don't live in a Utopian world.

Sorry, not trying to be preachy. Just my humble opinion.

P.S: immitime, I hope you are reading this and I sincerely wish you come back to this forum. You have been a very valuable member of the forum and have contributed immensely to it. Don't have a fall out on this minor issue of difference of opinions. Peace.

Well said! Couldn't have said it better.

GhostWriter
06-21-2013, 11:32 PM
+1 to the list of JontyRhodes, abcx13, immitime and others.

I think JontyRhodes laid it out pretty well.
Q, supporting PR instead of Citizenship for someone who broke the law does not make any one less compassionate in my opinion. I don't think immitime's point of view was on the "right of the right" of the political spectrum. He was not talking about deporting anyone, he was not talking about the status quo and not legalizing illegals. Your comment about being born in the right womb sounds touchy but that is the reality and not an elitist view. Your place of birth determines your citizenship and if you want to change that you need to follow the laws of the destination country (or have the power to conquer it).
I used to be Democrat leaning (in spite of being fiscally conservative) because I usually have liberal views on social issues, but last one year has changed my views. The shameless pursuit of latino vote by the Democrats and their use of legal immigrants as a bait to negotiate with Republicans does not leave them with any higher moral standards that they can boast of.
If I ever (and that as we all know is a big If) get a green card and then a citizenship my vote will go to the party that wanted me here (more than the other). Let the democrats get the 11m votes but they did lose mine (not that it would matter).
I agree with you that the fate of legal immigration has for the time being been tied to CIR (and the fate of illegal immigrants) but that is again a result of dirty politics and not necessarily how it should be (or who knows how it will be in future).



Q,

With due respect, I tend to disagree with you on this one. I think immitime raised a pretty valid question. I personally do not have any problem with pathway to citizenship to illegals but immitime has a point here. For Democrats, this is their future vote bank. They are not only doing this from a humanistic stand point. Republicans on the other side are willing to do it, especially in the Senate, because they know that they can also woo Hispanics to vote for them in next elections if they pass Immigration Reform. If Republicans don't do it, as many experts have analysed, they will not be in White House again. Now, anybody can disagree with this analysis but the fact remains that both parties have their own reasons to support CIR.

Because both parties have their own interests driving them to pass CIR, both parties have to compromise on several important principles that may be dear to them, in good faith of the bill, just like Leahy dropped the LGBT amendment in the judiciary mark up (although he came up with that later on). Then and only then, it will be a real bipartisan bill. That is why I agree with immitime again. I would disagree with Republicans for the poison pill amendments that they have introduced to kill the bill, like Cornyn border security and several others. But I would also disagree with the Democrats on insisting to get the federal health care benefits for illegals. That is just unsustainable for the health care system in my eyes, and an unnecessary burden on law abiding tax paying legal immigrants, permanent resident and citizens.

I seriously did not feel that immitime's question was on the right of the extreme right wingers. In fact, immitime has divided things black (law-breaking people) vs white (law-abiding people) which is not necessarily wrong while looking at it objectively. When you add humanistic angle to the immigration reform, things become grey and the line between right and wrong starts getting blurred. But no where, I felt that immitime's comment was elitist in nature and that he did not have regards for people who are less fortunate. There is nothing shameful in what immitime said and in fact, if you ask people, majority may agree with him.

I have nothing personal against illegals. In fact, I have worked in a free community clinic in Chicago for 3 years as a volunteer treating illegals only and every now and then, you stumble upon a sad story or tragedy. It is unfortunate but that's life. Ideal things happen in ideal world and unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world.

Just to give you a simple example. When illegal Bangladeshi immigrants come in India, again there will be same humanistic arguments (poverty in Bangladesh, better job opportunity in India, better life compared to Bangladesh etc.) but at the end of the day, the fact remains that their constant flow has changed demographics in Assam and now the native Bodo tribe has become a minority, losing their land and is facing a discrimination. Politicians have provided them ration cards and voter identification cards to get votes from last many years. Eventual Result: Assam Riots.

Now, obviously this can't be compared to US immigration but concept is similar. Protecting country's citizens and their interests, should be the primary aim of any immigration policy and the debate of how to do that is wide open and very partisan unfortunately.

CIR is a tricky issue and emotions run high. But I think we all should be pragmatic because we don't live in a Utopian world.

Sorry, not trying to be preachy. Just my humble opinion.

P.S: immitime, I hope you are reading this and I sincerely wish you come back to this forum. You have been a very valuable member of the forum and have contributed immensely to it. Don't have a fall out on this minor issue of difference of opinions. Peace.

idiotic
06-21-2013, 11:47 PM
http://www.sandiegored.com/noticias/25371/U-S-Congressman-Compares-Immigrants-to-Dogs/


FYI...

From what I learnt in my life, if you have "real" respect for anyone you won't compare them to dogs even in your sleep...

indiani
06-21-2013, 11:56 PM
In the discussions about legal vs illegal, "we all came legal here" arguments, there is one point we tend to miss. Neither us or the Europeans who consider USA as if it is their land have no right to be here to begin with. This continent is North America ( not Europe, not Asia). If anyone can claim any right to this land , it would be Hispanics They at least belong to this continent. We all ( including the Europeans who claim this to be their country ) are all immigrants/invaders.

Hispanics has every right to say "WTH, this is our continent, what are these Europeans and Asians doing here ?"

I don't even know how to respond to your post as i find it illogical and don't even understand what you think should happen.

every white/asian (race ) in this country who are citizenship by birth should leave and go to europe / asia and all "hispanics" in the world can stay in USA??

indiani
06-22-2013, 12:02 AM
+1 to the list of JontyRhodes, abcx13, immitime and others.

I think JontyRhodes laid it out pretty well.
Q, supporting PR instead of Citizenship for someone who broke the law does not make any one less compassionate in my opinion. I don't think immitime's point of view was on the "right of the right" of the political spectrum. He was not talking about deporting anyone, he was not talking about the status quo and not legalizing illegals. Your comment about being born in the right womb sounds touchy but that is the reality and not an elitist view. Your place of birth determines your citizenship and if you want to change that you need to follow the laws of the destination country (or have the power to conquer it).
I used to be Democrat leaning (in spite of being fiscally conservative) because I usually have liberal views on social issues, but last one year has changed my views. The shameless pursuit of latino vote by the Democrats and their use of legal immigrants as a bait to negotiate with Republicans does not leave them with any higher moral standards that they can boast of.
If I ever (and that as we all know is a big If) get a green card and then a citizenship my vote will go to the party that wanted me here (more than the other). Let the democrats get the 11m votes but they did lose mine (not that it would matter).
I agree with you that the fate of legal immigration has for the time being been tied to CIR (and the fate of illegal immigrants) but that is again a result of dirty politics and not necessarily how it should be (or who knows how it will be in future).

if "legal part" wasn't tied to this current bill and only for "illegals" I suspect more than 90% of the people on this forum would have hated it.

Thats why hispanic causes and dems have held us (legals ) hostage for more than a decade. ( 13 years of chasing a dream and not acheiving ruins lives to some extent ) but it helped obama win 2nd term.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 12:10 AM
Thats why hispanic causes and dems have held us (legals ) hostage for more than a decade. but it helped obama win 2nd term.

Please point me to republican legal immigration reform plan which democrats sabotaged.. AFAIK, all immigrant reduction organizations are republican.

indiani
06-22-2013, 12:24 AM
Please point me to republican legal immigration reform plan which democrats sabotaged.. AFAIK, all immigrant reduction organizations are republican.

3012 (bipartisan ) : if harry reid wanted to pass this he could have but he didn't care.

obama was ready to sign if it went to his desk, if harry reid would have spared just a few minutes it could have passed.

I know Grassley held it for a while and sessions wasn't big fan either but it has passed with such a majority in house, it could have passed senate if dems wanted to ( senate controlled by dems ) as once brought to vote it could have passed.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 12:26 AM
3012 (bipartisan ) : if harry reid wanted to pass this he could have but he didn't care.
obama was ready to sign if it went to his desk, if harry reid would have spared just a few minutes it could have passed.
I know Grassley held it for a while and sessions wasn't big fan either but it has passed with such a majority in house, it could have passed senate if dems wanted to ( senate controlled by dems ) as once brought to vote it could have passed.

It is not that easy. Grassley initially held the bill and later added his H1B reform which is totally an poison pill. If Grassley would have just been quiet, Harry reid would have had no issue in passing it with unanimous consent. Please be fair to people.

Even in house, remember democrats voted for the bill..
http://votesmart.org/bill/votes/37412#.UcU4A_nVCzk
House voting record out of 15 people voted Nay 13 were republicans..

As far as I remember, Grassley's amedment required employers to go through Labor process for each H1B. We all know how much pain labor process is..
And once you start the amendment process, everyone will throw their own monkey ones in.. The only way HR3012 would have passed is unanimous consent. Dems would have quietly passed the 1 page bill if Mr. Grassley did not sabotage.

Harry reid repetedly told HR3012 supporters like TechNet to go and talk to Grassley. Truth is talks broke down due to unreasonable amendments. The bill was always there on Senate calender to pass any day with unanimous consent.

Also, "Future flows" is a nice term for racism..

Adding, were there any other bills where republicans really sweated for legal immigrants? Please point me to same if any. The truth is republicans are enforcement only. Close the borders, reduce the immigration. Just pick the best hunting dogs. That's the truth.

qesehmk
06-22-2013, 01:52 AM
Lots of good thoughts to respond to.

Let me start with gs1968 and viz. I think, everything you said makes total sense to me including that citizenship shouldn't be a dealbreaker. As the president has said many times - let's use common sense. Unfortunately congress works on special interests and politics of division.

For the record - my argument is not that legals or illegals should have these rights or that. My point is about standing together with other immigrants preferably on compassionate grounds - but if not - at least for your own self interest.

Jonty I agree about the political reasons why dems and reps are rallying for / against CIR. Lets all agree that all those angles exist. What I would like to warn though is that this forum is meant for immigrants to help themselves and not engage in political mudslinging. It helps nobody. If you look at abcx and immitime - their posts are quite worthless. While I can live with disagreements with both of them, I completely disagree with you that immitime's posts are useful. The reason I am saying this is - invariably both of them tie their arguments to Obama bashing. Both of them engage in using sensational language. It confuses rather than clarifies the topic at hand.

I do think that it is quite shameful to be so myopically focused on personal agenda that one is not only apathetic to other immigrant groups but also rails against them. Unfortunately I would've to disagree with you on that one too.

On Bangladeshi illegal immigrants... I actually believe india should welcome SAARC immigration and regulate it for economic and geo-political reasons. I believe all immigration is good. People immigrate for economic reasons and if we have accepted free flow of capital then humans should also accept free flow of people. Indian government is run since independence by people who have no experience or aptitude for running a state. British created cleric class and handed over India to these morons who have been screwing us ever since. The only time India showed any wisdom in its foreign policy was when Jaswant Singh was the foreign minister. Anyway ... we can have separate discussions on those topics. But coming back to immigration - I think all immigration is good that happens for economic reasons. I am from Maharashtra and I do not like Thackray misusing immigration for his politics. Immigration has helped immigrants and the state of Maharashtra immensely. In fact immigrants invariably go to the land of opportunity. So it is a good thing for a country/place that immigrants come. It is a sign of strength and good fortunes. Same goes with USA.

Finally - I am not so sure that majority people would agree with immitime. Besides the number of people agreeing or disagreeing is not my measure and neither should be yours. Lets use our own moral compass - if not at least act in self interest and not rail against other immigrant groups.

Ghost - who you vote would be your personal choice. I personally would never make such a decision for so silly reason. In the end - politics has its ebb and flows - what's relatively permanent over time is the values that YOU espouse. When I look at the history of the USA, yankees ( who are dems today and were republicans under Lincoln) have been on the right side of history more than the southerners. Of course it is my own perspective. You may have different one.

Indiani - thanks for your kind words. I do think your observation about americans being afraid of illegals taking away their jobs is right. However that is true about legals as well. And it is true about every single profession. You are a physician (hope I got that right). You think AMA would be happy if tomorrow in a bid to lower costs hospitals create accelerated cross country programs between US and India? No way. Poor and rich have their own reasons to oppose any immigration - legal or illegal. So while you observation is right - I wouldn't necessarily draw any conclusion from that because that observation exists across all strata of american society.

This is my last on this topic. All I would say in closing is - even if we ignore moral compass in thinking about illegals - you should at least act in self interest and stand with all other immigrants. My best wishes to all.

qesehmk
06-22-2013, 07:44 AM
That is the bottomline. Isn't it. But people sometimes have a tendency to not let facts come in way of a good argument :)


House voting record out of 15 people voted Nay 13 were republicans..

gcq
06-22-2013, 08:30 AM
I don't even know how to respond to your post as i find it illogical and don't even understand what you think should happen.

every white/asian (race ) in this country who are citizenship by birth should leave and go to europe / asia and all "hispanics" in the world can stay in USA??
That is the exact logic. Europeans/Asians who were born here or immigrated here should leave the country to its original people. It is hypocritical to say people of the continent to be at the mercy of immigrants/invaders. Moreover illegal immigrants are here for an economic reason that benefits both them and this country. If republicans were that serious about preventing illegal immigrants coming to this country, they could easily heavily fine businesses that employ them. That would prevent all illegal immigration. They wouldn't do that because most of their businesses run with the help of these illegal immigrants.

On another note I find it quite ridiculous that a christian majority country is not compassionate to the underprivileged people crossing across the border.
They make a big deal about their so called "christian values". However they have no compassion for poor people and many of them discriminate based on skin color.

Democrats may have held us hostage for illegal immigration, but democrats are the ones that have any soft corner for immigration. GOP is supporting us not because they love immigrants, but because we make their businesses successful. We happen to be unintended beneficiaries of their business friendliness.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 11:21 AM
Another point.. My last one on this topic..

Crossing the border illegally is an "misdemeanor" according to law. I know many immigrants who have 1 misdemeanor(if that is the only one) in their records have got green card and eventual citizenship. (Trackitt posts are proofs). Illegal immigrants should be dealt with the same way as these "legal" immigrants with one misdemeanor. That is the "rule of law".

I know one of my friend hit an car in parking lot and did not leave a note and fled from the scene. Hit and Run is a misdeamenor as per rule of law and he was never caught. Even legal immigrants get away with "misdemeanors".

Not showing interest income in fixed deposits in India in US tax return is a Felony as per law which will prevent citizenship even according to current law and CIR. I know many of my collegues never do this in intent to save money(we already pay enough tax. Why more willingly is the argument i hear?). Well payroll taxes are never optional. The area which will show one's real law abiding nature is one's filing of income tax. I will leave it your judgement of how much law abiding we really are before judging others !!

indiani
06-22-2013, 12:35 PM
It is not that easy. Grassley initially held the bill and later added his H1B reform which is totally an poison pill. If Grassley would have just been quiet, Harry reid would have had no issue in passing it with unanimous consent. Please be fair to people.

Even in house, remember democrats voted for the bill..
http://votesmart.org/bill/votes/37412#.UcU4A_nVCzk
House voting record out of 15 people voted Nay 13 were republicans..

As far as I remember, Grassley's amedment required employers to go through Labor process for each H1B. We all know how much pain labor process is..
And once you start the amendment process, everyone will throw their own monkey ones in.. The only way HR3012 would have passed is unanimous consent. Dems would have quietly passed the 1 page bill if Mr. Grassley did not sabotage.

Harry reid repetedly told HR3012 supporters like TechNet to go and talk to Grassley. Truth is talks broke down due to unreasonable amendments. The bill was always there on Senate calender to pass any day with unanimous consent.

Also, "Future flows" is a nice term for racism..

Adding, were there any other bills where republicans really sweated for legal immigrants? Please point me to same if any. The truth is republicans are enforcement only. Close the borders, reduce the immigration. Just pick the best hunting dogs. That's the truth.

well all your points were well taken but let me add If Democratic majority were so "STRONGLY FOR 3012" , they could have passed it without grassley's amendment as both the judiciary and the main senate is controlled by democrats.

everything you said is accurate and I agree with your point that if Grassley didn't come in the way , may be 3012 could have passed and also i think as a whole republicans in general are anti- all immigrants ( even though they claim to support legals ).

Inspite of all my opinions/ thoughts ; I have spent time and money for 3012 and significant time for CIR passage and will continue to do so

indiani
06-22-2013, 12:40 PM
Another point.. My last one on this topic..

Crossing the border illegally is an "misdemeanor" according to law. I know many immigrants who have 1 misdemeanor(if that is the only one) in their records have got green card and eventual citizenship. (Trackitt posts are proofs). Illegal immigrants should be dealt with the same way as these "legal" immigrants with one misdemeanor. That is the "rule of law".

I know one of my friend hit an car in parking lot and did not leave a note and fled from the scene. Hit and Run is a misdeamenor as per rule of law and he was never caught. Even legal immigrants get away with "misdemeanors".

Not showing interest income in fixed deposits in India in US tax return is a Felony as per law which will prevent citizenship even according to current law and CIR. I know many of my collegues never do this in intent to save money(we already pay enough tax. Why more willingly is the argument i hear?). Well payroll taxes are never optional. The area which will show one's real law abiding nature is one's filing of income tax. I will leave it your judgement of how much law abiding we really are before judging others !!

I agree with the facts you gave but disagree with conclusions
: "Illegal immigrants should be dealt with the same way as these "legal" immigrants with one misdemeanor. That is the "rule of law"."
if something is rule of law and the executive branch is not following , the concerned groups can sue in the court but I am afraid based on the current law, "people who crossed border illegally and stayed for several years" if caught should be deported. I am not suggesting that should happen, I am just saying that is the law.

indiani
06-22-2013, 12:46 PM
That is the exact logic. Europeans/Asians who were born here or immigrated here should leave the country to its original people. It is hypocritical to say people of the continent to be at the mercy of immigrants/invaders. Moreover illegal immigrants are here for an economic reason that benefits both them and this country. If republicans were that serious about preventing illegal immigrants coming to this country, they could easily heavily fine businesses that employ them. That would prevent all illegal immigration. They wouldn't do that because most of their businesses run with the help of these illegal immigrants.

On another note I find it quite ridiculous that a christian majority country is not compassionate to the underprivileged people crossing across the border.
They make a big deal about their so called "christian values". However they have no compassion for poor people and many of them discriminate based on skin color.

Democrats may have held us hostage for illegal immigration, but democrats are the ones that have any soft corner for immigration. GOP is supporting us not because they love immigrants, but because we make their businesses successful. We happen to be unintended beneficiaries of their business friendliness.

I am afraid you not following "your own value" , as i suspect you are an asian. shouldn't you go back to asia based on your logic. if you practice what you preach may be I will take "your values" seriously.

by the way this is not a "christian country" , only the far right uses it. folks who have enough education and logic especially younger folks aren't interested in "invisible man" in the sky or 'fairy tales' and the percentage of these folks are growing every year ( fastest growing group in the country- people without any religious affiliation )

Please do not take my post as "a personal attack", there is no other way i could have made my points . I meant absolutely no disrespect.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 12:47 PM
well all your points were well taken but let me add If Democratic majority were so "STRONGLY FOR 3012" , they could have passed it without grassley's amendment as both the judiciary and the main senate is controlled by democrats.

I agree democrats were not adamant in getting HR 3012 passed but you got to see the reason behind it and be appreciative of it.
"Anti immigrant lobby in Washington is too powerful to fight piece by piece." The winning strategy is get all lobbying behind one bill and go for the kill(which is what is happening now and even then we are seeing still how much difficult it is).
If Reid would have filed cloture on a small one page bill it would needlessly raise questions among other lobbying organizations and it is not fair to criticize him for not doing this and stating he was the reason behind the bill dying. In the same way, we can even say Jason Chaffetz/Bob Goodlate/Boehner did not convince Grassley to stop giving amendments and let it pass. The credit for creating it and killing it should go to our republican buddies.
The only way HR3012 could have passed was quietly with unanimous consent :)


everything you said is accurate and I agree with your point that if Grassley didn't come in the way , may be 3012 could have passed and also i think as a whole republicans in general are anti- all immigrants ( even though they claim to support legals ).
Inspite of all my opinions/ thoughts ; I have spent time and money for 3012 and significant time for CIR passage and will continue to do so

Even I did. I followed, supported contributed and lobbied as much as I can. It was even in the Jobs council recommendation and Obama's Jobs's act the same year.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 12:56 PM
I agree with the facts you gave but disagree with conclusions
: "Illegal immigrants should be dealt with the same way as these "legal" immigrants with one misdemeanor. That is the "rule of law"."
if something is rule of law and the executive branch is not following , the concerned groups can sue in the court but I am afraid based on the current law, "people who crossed border illegally and stayed for several years" if caught should be deported. I am not suggesting that should happen, I am just saying that is the law.

Current law is "people who crossed the border illegally should be deported and they should go back to their home country and stay there for 10 years and then eligible to reapply. They will become legal again and just like a person who has committed a misdemeanor". Obviously this is causing hardships in many families which is the real issue as 10 years is not a small time frame to be away from kids and family and CIR is just asking to let these people live here meanwhile without separating the families(as it is against American values). I see nothing greatly wrong with it. Legal immigrants with misdemeanors in their records are not treated in the same way.

indiani
06-22-2013, 12:59 PM
I agree democrats were not adamant in getting HR 3012 passed but you got to see the reason behind it and be appreciative of it.
"Anti immigrant lobby in Washington is too powerful to fight piece by piece." The winning strategy is get all lobbying behind one bill and go for the kill(which is what is happening now and even then we are seeing still how much difficult it is).
If Reid would have filed cloture on a small one page bill it would needlessly raise questions among other lobbying organizations and it is not fair to criticize him for not doing this and stating he was the reason behind the bill dying. In the same way, we can even say Jason Chaffetz/Bob Goodlate/Boehner did not convince Grassley to stop giving amendments and let it pass. The credit for creating it and killing it should go to our republican buddies.
The only way HR3012 could have passed was quietly with unanimous consent :)



Even I did. I followed, supported contributed and lobbied as much as I can. It was even in the Jobs council recommendation and Obama's Jobs's act the same year.

I should admit that you have very good understanding of the political process and the "background' issues behind all these bills. My understanding has certainly changed after reading your posts and my prior opinions are purely based on my prior knowledge and now I am exactly on the same page with you assley (sorry for the typo) killed the bill.

Moreover I think you seem to be quite involved in the process far more than I am, I never went to DC but did everything locally

indiani
06-22-2013, 01:03 PM
Current law is "people who crossed the border illegally should be deported and they should go back to their home country and stay there for 10 years and then eligible to reapply. They will become legal again and just like a person who has committed a misdemeanor". Obviously this is causing hardships in many families which is the real issue as 10 years is not a small time frame to be away from kids and family and CIR is just asking to let these people live here meanwhile without separating the families(as it is against American values). I see nothing greatly wrong with it. Legal immigrants with misdemeanors in their records are not treated in the same way.

I think you missed my point, i agree with what you want to happen and also why it should happen but i ahve trouble understanding when you say "its the rule of law". Please read you statement again as you seem to be a logical and knowledgable person and you might understand why i ahve trouble digesting that post

qesehmk
06-22-2013, 01:11 PM
Rarely a debate has a happy ending. It takes a real man (or a woman) to see others point of view and indiani you certainly are one.

If I stepped on somebody's toes - my apologies to you (including immitime and abcx).


I should admit that you have very good understanding of the political process and the "background' issues behind all these bills. My understanding has certainly changed after reading your posts and my prior opinions are purely based on my prior knowledge and now I am exactly on the same page with you assley (sorry for the typo) killed the bill.

Moreover I think you seem to be quite involved in the process far more than I am, I never went to DC but did everything locally

idiotic
06-22-2013, 01:11 PM
I should admit that you have very good understanding of the political process and the "background' issues behind all these bills. My understanding has certainly changed after reading your posts and my prior opinions are purely based on my prior knowledge and now I am exactly on the same page with you assley (sorry for the typo) killed the bill.

Moreover I think you seem to be quite involved in the process far more than I am, I never went to DC but did everything locally

Thanks. Let's fight as a whole immigrant group for the CIR as much as we can is what I would request everyone.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 01:16 PM
I think you missed my point, i agree with what you want to happen and also why it should happen but i ahve trouble understanding when you say "its the rule of law". Please read you statement again as you seem to be a logical and knowledgable person and you might understand why i ahve trouble digesting that post

Agreed it wasn't politically correct. The point I was trying to make is "pathway to citizenship" is not wrong in any sense even as per the "rule of law". It is in line with the "rule of the law" as legal immigrants with "misdemeanors" get the same treatment. Under CIR these folks has to wait 10 years before they can get greened. the real point is where(inside or outside the country)?

I think making them wait 10 years is a fair punishment even inline with current law. These people were exploited and contributed to this society for years is the real truth. They intentionally kept the borders open for business owners to have unwritten slavery. Those who exploited them till now goes unpunished. The business owners who exploited them will go unpunished one bit.

If one does an wrong he should be held accountable and punished(not in a cruel way). We do speeding violation(civil infraction) we pay the fine get points and move on with it. One should not be held accountable forever. Crossing illegally has its own punishment and people should get the punishment but does not mean that we have to cruel in punishing. Separating kids and mothers is one of the worst cruelty. If the laws are so broken that these things happen in the scale of large numbers (millions as of today) law needs to be revised and we have to fair to these people.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 01:30 PM
Rarely a debate has a happy ending. It takes a real man (or a woman) to see others point of view and indiani you certainly are one.

If I stepped on somebody's toes - my apologies to you (including immitime and abcx).

It take lot of courage to request for public apology also. I sincerely appreciate you for this.

Ramsen
06-22-2013, 01:42 PM
I should admit that you have very good understanding of the political process and the "background' issues behind all these bills. My understanding has certainly changed after reading your posts and my prior opinions are purely based on my prior knowledge and now I am exactly on the same page with you assley (sorry for the typo) killed the bill.

Moreover I think you seem to be quite involved in the process far more than I am, I never went to DC but did everything locally

Probably this is final attempt by conservatives to delay or block the bill. Anyhow now it is done deal in Senate. But still house will try to block the bill anyhow. When there is so much struggle in Senate even after enough votes house is do or die for conservatives.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/mitch-mcconnell-immigration-93190.html?hp=f2

The passing of 2013 CIR will have far reaching impact apart from immigration and social life. Anti immigrant groups like numbersusa,alipac,fair will become almost non existant. Also relevance of many pro immigrant groups and lobbysits including ** also will be lost as there will not any need for those as the people stop donating. So I am sure there will be extremely tough battle if there is battle in the house. Bohner may not have freedom as Mcconnell.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 02:19 PM
Probably this is final attempt by conservatives to delay or block the bill. Anyhow now it is done deal in Senate. But still house will try to block the bill anyhow. When there is so much struggle in Senate even after enough votes house is do or die for conservatives.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/mitch-mcconnell-immigration-93190.html?hp=f2

The passing of 2013 CIR will have far reaching impact apart from immigration and social life. Anti immigrant groups like numbersusa,alipac,fair will become almost non existant. Also relevance of many pro immigrant groups and lobbysits including ** also will be lost as there will not any need for those as the people stop donating. So I am sure there will be extremely tough battle if there is battle in the house. Bohner may not have freedom as Mcconnell.

We have to hope moderate republicans prevail in this historic fight. Let us help them. Please pick a lobbying organization of your choice and actively participate in calling and urging the senators to pass this next week. Especially NJ community where Chieasa is an unknown vote and actually he replaced a strong "yes" vote(Frank Lautenberg) recently..

Chiesa, Jeff - (R - NJ) Class II
1 RUSSELL COURTYARD WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3224
E-mail: Senator_Chiesa@Chiesa.Senate.gov

rupen86
06-22-2013, 02:39 PM
We have to hope moderate republicans prevail in this historic fight. Let us help them. Please pick a lobbying organization of your choice and actively participate in calling and urging the senators to pass this next week. Especially NJ community where Chieasa is an unknown vote and actually he replaced a strong "yes" vote(Frank Lautenberg) recently..

Chiesa, Jeff - (R - NJ) Class II
1 RUSSELL COURTYARD WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3224
E-mail: Senator_Chiesa@Chiesa.Senate.gov

I sent an email and tried to call but call directly goes to voicemail and it is full so can't leave voice mail also.

gcq
06-22-2013, 03:03 PM
I am afraid you not following "your own value" , as i suspect you are an asian. shouldn't you go back to asia based on your logic. if you practice what you preach may be I will take "your values" seriously.

by the way this is not a "christian country" , only the far right uses it. folks who have enough education and logic especially younger folks aren't interested in "invisible man" in the sky or 'fairy tales' and the percentage of these folks are growing every year ( fastest growing group in the country- people without any religious affiliation )

Please do not take my post as "a personal attack", there is no other way i could have made my points . I meant absolutely no disrespect.

My comments are meant for people who believe that illegals should not be allowed to immigrate in this country. I don't believe that line. I think you are not taking an argument for what it is, "an argument/debate point". What you responded was with a personal attack, not a counter argument.

I am an asian and I am not going back since I am compassionate for these illegal folks as well.

Please respond only if you have a valid point. Personal attack has no value in a debate.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 05:40 PM
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2498668325001/sen-corker-border-surge-solves-security-problem/?playlist_id=2114913880001

Must watch to understand the new felonious "funny" arguments.

=> 20000 border security .. big government.. ofcourse. it is commonsense.. but you asked and fought for it dude !! This way it is big governement other way it is open border..
=> E-Verify violation of 4th amedment of constitution. Isn't DMV also violation of 4th amedment then in same scale at state level? Social security violation of 4th amendment?
=> New Wall will be a standing embarrasement for republican party because we asked to build it.. Wooow.. I think these folks have MENSA membership.. My head is spinning :)

Why can't they just have the face to say "you know what. we do not have any reason but just kill this bill. we like the current system"..

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2498667240001/historic-embarrassment-henninger-blasts-border-fence-plan/?playlist_id=2114913880001

Jonty Rhodes
06-22-2013, 06:18 PM
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2498668325001/sen-corker-border-surge-solves-security-problem/?playlist_id=2114913880001

Must watch to understand the new felonious "funny" arguments.

=> 20000 border security .. big government.. ofcourse. it is commonsense.. but you asked and fought for it dude !! This way it is big governement other way it is open border..
=> E-Verify violation of 4th amedment of constitution. Isn't DMV also violation of 4th amedment then in same scale at state level? Social security violation of 4th amendment?
=> New Wall will be a standing embarrasement for republican party because we asked to build it.. Wooow.. I think these folks have MENSA membership.. My head is spinning :)

Why can't they just have the face to say "you know what. we do not have any reason but just kill this bill. we like the current system"..

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2498667240001/historic-embarrassment-henninger-blasts-border-fence-plan/?playlist_id=2114913880001

These guys are a bunch of loonies. No wonder they are losing the ground slowly with their ignorance and hatred. Fox news (propaganda) is just a Tea Party Mouthpiece and I feel that it has actually damaged Republican Party immensely because moderate sensible Republicans have been sidelined completely and their voice has been muffled totally. Icing on that stinking cake is people like Rush Limbaugh. I feel like puking, when Fox News says "Fair and Balanced" in their tag line.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 06:27 PM
These guys are a bunch of loonies. No wonder they are losing the ground slowly with their ignorance and hatred. Fox news (propaganda) is just a Tea Party Mouthpiece and I feel that it has actually damaged Republican Party immensely because moderate sensible Republicans have been sidelined completely and their voice has been muffled totally. Icing on that stinking cake is people like Rush Limbaugh. I feel like puking, when Fox News says "Fair and Balanced" in their tag line.

Actually Fox news is a friend of S.744 as per tea party because Bill O Reilly supported or atleast did not overly attack it..

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/report-mccain-rubio-got-fox-news-on-board

Ramsen
06-22-2013, 06:27 PM
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2498668325001/sen-corker-border-surge-solves-security-problem/?playlist_id=2114913880001

Why can't they just have the face to say "you know what. we do not have any reason but just kill this bill. we like the current system"..



No need to worry about this house GOP will tell this

idiotic
06-22-2013, 06:33 PM
No need to worry about this house GOP will tell this

...and put the blame on Obama for passing a "partisan, weak, hopelessly dysfunctional" bill in Senate which does not solve any of our curent real immigration problems of getting rid of some people under the "rule of law" :)

indiani
06-22-2013, 06:56 PM
My comments are meant for people who believe that illegals should not be allowed to immigrate in this country. I don't believe that line. I think you are not taking an argument for what it is, "an argument/debate point". What you responded was with a personal attack, not a counter argument.

I am an asian and I am not going back since I am compassionate for these illegal folks as well.

Please respond only if you have a valid point. Personal attack has no value in a debate.

I have included the last line in my previous post anticipating some response like this.

I absolutely do not want to respond to you any further as I don't have to / don't want to.

idiotic
06-22-2013, 09:57 PM
I have included the last line in my previous post anticipating some response like this.

I absolutely do not want to respond to you any further as I don't have to / don't want to.

I think this is what gcq meant.. Correct me if I am wrong..

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/S/P/3/Show-Me-Your-Papers.jpg

Peace..

More here.. funny and thoughtful.. http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/immigration/ig/Immigration-Cartoons/Anchor-Babies.htm

indiani
06-22-2013, 11:17 PM
currently the USA is a democratic nation with its own constitution and laws.

The Executive branch (Obama and feds ) implement the laws.

whatever the history might be the biggest reason behind the CIR is "political calculation" more than compassion or anything else. here why going back in history might not make much sense ( especially beyond a century ) to make decisions about current laws:

Human migration have taken place as long as mankind existed, in fact if you understand terms like "bottleneck in human evolution" ( all humans currently living on this planet are very close knit relatives as compared to many other species ) etc. and something about anthropology etc. I can go on but I dont want to bore anyone and I am not interested trying to make any further points.